From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: School House Hype Date: 03 Aug 1998 17:24:48 -0600 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Thu, 30 Jul 1998 20:30:04 -0600 Received: from fs1.mainstream.net by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id UAA00325; Thu, 30 Jul 1998 20:18:49 -0600 Received: (from smap@localhost) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id WAA03619; Thu, 30 Jul 1998 22:28:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1) by fs1.mainstream.net via smap (V1.3) id sma003445; Thu Jul 30 22:26:58 1998 Message-Id: <199807310207.VAA04718@monarch.papillion.ne.us> Errors-To: listproc@mainstream.com Reply-To: mriddle@monarch.papillion.ne.us Originator: noban@mainstream.net Sender: noban@Mainstream.net Precedence: bulk X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Tanya: Surf to and follow the links.=20 The "Justice Policy Institute," a part of the "Center for Juvenile and=20 Criminal Justice," just released a report on "School House Hype: School=20 Shootings and the Real Risks Kids Face in America." The report might not be so bad, but they have a page on "School House=20 Hope" that's full of links to gun control programs. They also have a=20 with the offer: "Send us the best prevention program link you know of, and we'll make=20 part of our hope page." May I suggest that you (and anyone cc'd on this message that might be = so=20 inclined) send them *lots* of information on Eddie Eagle? (Note to=20 cc's: be respectful, not vengeful, or we'll achieve the wrong purpose.) Respectfully, Mike Life Member, NRA - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: Reno urges lawyers to fight guns Date: 04 Aug 1998 06:51:00 -0700 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- A note to Ms. Reno, If American citizens did not feel the need to protect themselves from your thugs, perhaps we would not so urgently feel the need to posses and know how to use guns? But, as you have already shown us, we must continue to be prepared to protect ourselves against violence perpetrated on us by "our own" government. As long as this continues, all efforts to restrict sale and possession of firearms will meet with very heavy resistance. Perhaps you folks are the ones who should disarm? Liberty Belle ******************************************************* Politics Updated 7:35 PM ET August 3, 1998 Reno urges lawyers to fight gun violence By Gail Appleson, Law Correspondent TORONTO (Reuters) - U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno said Monday that reducing gun-related injuries and deaths must become a priority in the United States and that lawyers should play a key role in fighting such violence. "The bottom line is that lawyers can change our country's attitude about guns. We can do so much to end gun violence and if we really work hard at it ... we can end the culture of violence in this nation," she said in a speech to the American Bar Association annual meeting here. The ABA occasionally meets in Toronto because U.S. and Canadian lawyers have overlapping legal interests. "In the five years from 1992 through 1996, the city in which we are meeting, Toronto, experienced exactly 100 gun homicides. Chicago, an American city of comparable size, had 3,063 gun homicides," she said. Reno said that about 100 people die every day in the United States due to guns, roughly about the same mortality rate as Americans with AIDS. "We do not have to be the most violent nation in the world," she said. Following Reno's speech, the ABA's policy-making body, its House of Delegates, passed a resolution supporting a comprehensive approach to address gun violence by young people. This would include supporting school-based peer mediation programs, prevention and education programs; increased efforts to enforce laws to prevent unauthorized or illegal access to firearms by minors and enactment of laws that emphasize adult responsibility. Reno said that lawyers have been on the forefront in the fight against domestic violence and they can do the same when it comes to guns. "Let us create a new frontier for lawyers to show again what they can do," she said, praising the ABA resolution. "We've got to cut through the rhetoric that clouds this issue day after day. Lawyers can lead the way in doing that." She suggested lawyers urge their governors and state legislators to pass laws that impose criminal penalties on adults who store guns in ways that are accessible to children. Lawyers can also work with mayors and city councils to pass local gun ordinances to reduce the availability and accessibility of guns, Reno said. Bar associations can also work with local schools to teach peer mediation or conflict resolution programs for children so that they will learn how to resolve their problems without resorting to violence, she suggested. She said lawyers have to help teach children that guns really do kill people. "They are not status symbols, they are not glamorous and they are not the right way to resolve conflicts," Reno said. -- ******************************************************* E Pluribus Unum The Central Ohio Patriot Group P.O. Box 791 Eventline/Voicemail: (614) 823-8499 Grove City, OH 43123 Meetings: Monday Evenings, 7:30pm, Ryan's Steakhouse 3635 W. Dublin-Granville Rd. (just East of Sawmill Rd.) http://www.infinet.com/~eplurib eplurib@infinet.com ******************************************************* - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: Re: Heads Up on Clinton's Troubles Date: 04 Aug 1998 13:05:37 -0600 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Tue, 04 Aug 1998 11:00:42 -0600 Received: from fs1.mainstream.net by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id KAA03949; Tue, 4 Aug 1998 10:49:28 -0600 Received: (from smap@localhost) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id MAA15394; Tue, 4 Aug 1998 12:58:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1) by fs1.mainstream.net via smap (V1.3) id sma015153; Tue Aug 4 12:56:01 1998 Message-Id: Errors-To: listproc@mainstream.com Reply-To: TSBench@aol.com Originator: noban@mainstream.net Sender: noban@Mainstream.net Precedence: bulk X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Just to let you know, but ............. The Democratic National Committee is making the rounds, calling radio = stations all over the country trying to put together a media blitz for this = Thursday with spokespeople talking about the "economy." My station is just a 1000 watter in the Massachusetts boonies and my news director recieved a 'personal call' from Steve Grossman, the Chairman of = the DNC, looking to book an AM Drive time appearance. Massachusetts was = Clinton's biggest state in the last election (beating Dole 2-1.)=20 When my newsie called back to confirm, he mentioned to a DNC gofer that = "you must be in deep shit to be pressing on this bullshit." The gofer replied, = "if you only knew" and hung up. Hope springs eternal. Regards, TSB - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: World views U.S. as foolish for lack of gun ban Date: 05 Aug 1998 08:02:00 -0700 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- http://www.azstarnet.com/public/dnews/0804cv3.html World views U.S. as foolish for lack of gun ban By Bonnie Erbe It's fascinating to watch an American crisis from an international perspective. It's particularly fascinating when the topic is yet another murder spree by an American madman with a weapon. I was in London recently when a British TV network aired a report from Washington on Russell Weston Jr.'s alleged murder of two Capitol police officers and wounding of a bystander. The first minute or so of the report outlined the facts as known at that early stage of the event. Then the reporter cut to a statement by House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., and then to a teary-eyed House Whip Tom DeLay, R-Texas, paying homage to the dead officers. When the reporter appeared on-camera, he said: ``Remarkably, since this event took place there has been no talk of gun control by any high-level United States official.'' He went on to chronicle the now-long list of shooting sprees Americans have endured in recent times, including four major shootings at public schools in the past year and countless more ``minor'' ones where only one or two children have been murdered. And he reflected the view of his incredulous audience that American society would tolerate so much violence - to the point where ``going postal'' has become a universally understood addition to American jargon - without widespread calls for some sort of regulatory action. In England, national gun control has been a reality since the turn of the century. Strict national controls banning most gun ownership later took effect in 1920. Even today in central London bobbies patrol with sticks and handcuffs but no firearms - an inconceivable thought to Americans whose officers must be armed to kill. The U.S. gun lobby spends huge sums of money trying to persuade the public and Congress that gun ownership and crime rates are unrelated. They champion the claim that controlling (or, perish the thought, banning) gun ownership on the national level would have no impact on our crime rate, nor on the doings of Russell Weston Jr. and his ilk. But statistics simply do not bear that out. No one knows for sure what impact strict national gun control would have on the American crime rate, since it's never been in effect. Banning ownership might not eliminate homicide or murder sprees. But it would certainly cause a remarkable drop in homicide and violent crime rates. According to World Health Organization figures, between 1982-88, the U.S. homicide rate (8.8 per 100,000) was roughly 12 times that of England and Wales (0.7). Those figures (the 12-to-1 ratio) correlate quite closely with gun ownership rates in the respective countries. An international victimization survey cited in ``Experiences of Crime Across the World'' (1991) showed weapons ownership at 48.9 percent among Americans and 4.7 percent in England and Wales. The National Center for Policy Analysis, a pro-gun lobby group with offices in Washington, D.C., and Dallas, Texas, boasts on its Web site that gun ownership and homicide rates are unrelated. It touts, for example, an extremely high murder rate in Northern Ireland (7 in 1989, compared with the American rate of 8.8 I cite above in the previous year). But let's remember that Northern Ireland was until last month in the middle of a civil sectarian war. And its murder rate was still lower than ours. These are not statistics a rational person would cite seriously. The center also argues that America has had federal gun controls in effect since 1968. But every informed American knows gun control is primarily a matter of state law. In my home state of Virginia, lawmakers debated a law limiting weapons purchases to ``one a month'' not too long ago. Until we have real federal gun laws, state regulations are so patchwork they are largely useless. It's depressing, but not surprising, that even the shooting spree at the Capitol will not prompt a serious dialogue on major, national gun control. It should be noted, however, that in the eyes of most Western nations we look like fools who suffer our own ignorance gladly. Bonnie Erbe, host of the PBS program ``To the Contrary,'' writes this column for Scripps Howard News Service. A robber driving down the street looking for a house to rob, he drives by the first house that has a sitcker in the window that says; "I don't dial 911" - under is a Colt 45. The next house has a sticker and it says; "Support Gun Control" - under is a Colt 45 with an X. Which house got robbed? UNITED NATIONS GUN CONTROL http://www.un.org/Depts/dda/Firstcom/SGreport52/a52298.html http://www.un.org/Depts/dda/Firstcom/SGreport52/a52229.html http://www.un.org/Depts/dda/Firstcom/SGreport52/a52264.html UN - DISARM AMERICA STATE DEPT 7277 http://harvest-trust.org/7277.htm +++ GUN CONTROL - 2ND AMENDMENT +++ JPFO http://www.jpfo.org Dial 911 and DIE ! http://www.jpfo.org/Dial911.htm GUN OWNERS OF AMERICA http://www.gunowners.org American Patriot Friends Network (APFN) APFN EMAIL LIST SUBSCRIBE/UNSCBSCRIBE IN SUBJECT LINE TO APFN@netbox.com APFN ONELIST: http://www.onelist/subscribe.cgi/apfn http://www.esotericworldnews.com/apfncont.htm http://www.freeyellow.com/members5/apfn/ - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: White House Death Threats Date: 05 Aug 1998 11:08:42 -0600 Received: from vader.thnet.com ([206.98.115.1]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Wed, 05 Aug 1998 06:11:32 -0600 Received: from bruce8.thnet.com (bruce8.thnet.com [206.98.115.108]) by vader.thnet.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA01804; Wed, 5 Aug 1998 06:59:45 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199808051159.GAA01804@vader.thnet.com> Comments: Authenticated sender is Organization: The Vigo Examiner Reply-to: Distribution@Vigo-Examiner.com Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.23) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline White House Death Threats Linda Tripp Goes Where Reporters Fear to Tread By Carl Limbacher The Washington Weekly OYSTER BAY -- On Wednesday, a visibly shaken Linda Tripp took to the microphones to speak out after seven long months of being portrayed in the press as a betrayer, manipulator and all around bad person. Fresh from her final appearance before Ken Starr's Washington grand jury, Tripp talked about herself, her motives and most importantly, the dirty little secret the national media has kept from the American public for six years: "As a result of trying to earn a living, I became aware between 1993 and 1997 of actions by high government officials that may have been against = the law. For that period of nearly five years, the things I witnessed concerning several different subjects made me increasingly fearful that this information was dangerous, very dangerous, to possess." Just what kind of danger was Ms. Tripp talking about? As a political appointee, no doubt her honest testimony about "several different = subjects" could be hazardous to her career. But Tripp had other reasons to be concerned - as the press has known for months. Still, journalists have refused to report on the subject in any way that might cause appropriate alarm. During a May 26 appearance on Larry King Live, Tripp's lawyer, Anthony Zaccagnini, was asked why Tripp was sequestered in an FBI "safe house" early on in the Lewinsky investigation. Zaccagnini replied: "Linda Tripp was the subject of a lot of press scrutiny and there were some threats = made against her life." For that reason, he said, the FBI in conjunction with Starr's office "decided to move her to a secure location." Later on in the King interview,= Zaccagnini said that Tripp feared losing her job and felt threatened by another "danger" that he was not at liberty to discuss. The day after Tripp's attorney revealed the stunning news that Ken Starr's key cooperating witness had been the target of death threats, not a single American news outlet dared report the story. Only the British wire service Reuters carried the news. Their headline, "Linda Tripp faced death threats, lawyer says" made it = hard to miss this bombshell, but somehow our media managed the trick. What's worse, this wasn't the first indication that Tripp may have been = the target of a White House campaign to intimidate her through threats of physical violence. In their March 23 issue, Newsweek buried this little tidbit: According to a source familiar with Tripp's account, the president would = be "extremely upset" if Tripp were to contradict him about (Clinton gropee Kathleen) Willey, (Monica) Lewinsky told Tripp. Lewinsky said that the president expected Tripp to be a team player. "He feels you screwed him in the (previous) Newsweek article," Lewinsky allegedly said. Tripp should know, Lewinsky warned, that both Linda and her children were "in danger" = if she didn't testify the right way about the Willey episode. There's the "D" word again, this time emanating, allegedly, from the president himself via Monica Lewinsky. In a column that began causing a stir on the internet and talk radio on Friday (though not slated to appear till Monday) Fox newsman Tony Snow reports this White House shocker under the headline "The Threat to Linda Tripp." But this bombshell only seems new because the story failed to set off media smoke alarms when they first got wind of it. Newsweek headlined their March 23 report, "What Made Linda Do it?" -- as if somehow she was the one who had issued a death threat. The same Newsweek story said Tripp has told co-workers that her problems = at the White House began because, "I knew too much about Whitewater." Whitewater for Tripp was Vincent Foster's death, and what she'd witnessed inside the White House as aides mounted a cover-up. Tripp's confidante, Lucianne Goldberg told a New York radio audience last week that Tripp = knows more about the Foster case than she's told so far, because, says Goldberg, investigators "didn't ask Linda the right questions." Rather than inquire as to just what it is that Ms. Tripp knows, and why that knowledge has put her in danger, journalists prefer to raise = questions about her motives for taping Lewinsky -- an alleged sin now elevated by pundits to the status of a war crime. But if the press really thinks the burning questions here have to do with Tripp's motivation, then they might consult another witness with her own famous tapes, who minces no words about why she made them. Gennifer = Flowers was grilled by Fox newswoman Penny Crone on New York radio over a year = ago. Like Newsweek, Crone was perturbed by the surreptitious recording of presidents and their paramours: CRONE: Isn't it kind of crummy to make tapes when you're having an affair with the guy? FLOWERS: I made the tapes to protect myself because some very scary things were going on. I was getting threats on the telephone. CRONE: What kind of threats? Were they saying they were going to kill you? FLOWERS: Yes, I had some saying I was going to get beaten up. I had some saying I was going to be killed. When asked to name names, Flowers implied that these threats were anonymous. But she did reveal that "Democratic operatives intimated that there would be some problems and that I would not be in a secure situation." CRONE: Do you think President Clinton was behind this? FLOWERS: What I thought was -- after my home was ransacked, that he was behind that. (WABC Talk Radio, 7/3/97) This blockbuster news received no coverage, though the New York Post did report Flowers' response to Crone's query about whether Clinton was well endowed. Though perhaps relevant at the time to Paula Jones' "distinguishing characteristic" claim, this news pales in importance next to information suggesting that someone had engineered a campaign of violence to intimidate witnesses on Clinton's behalf. Still, even when Flowers repeated her version of the threats she faced to Larry King, no = one in the press reported it. Tripp's experience mirrors that of Flowers' in another important way. Flowers, like Tripp, was urged to lie to protect Bill Clinton -- not = merely to the press, but under oath. Flowers was worried about her state job. She was about to be grilled by the Arkansas State Labor Grievance Committee over a complaint filed by Charlette Perry, a qualified African American in line for a promotion, whom Clinton ordered bumped to open a slot for his unqualified girlfriend. Flowers' famous tapes catch Clinton blatantly suborning perjury: FLOWERS: The only thing that concerns me, where I'm concerned at this point, is the state job. CLINTON: Yeah, I never thought about that. But as long as you say you'd just been looking for one -- if they ever ask you if you talked to me = about it, you can say no. In the midst of Monica-mania, the press behaves as if they don't know = about Clinton's pattern of obstructing justice -- proven six years ago by Gennifer Flowers' smoking gun tapes. But it's Clinton's pattern of witness intimidation that should scare the daylights out of every American. And that pattern would no doubt put a severe crimp in those sky-high presidential approval ratings if the media began calling attention to the terrorist tactics employed against so many who cross this president. Just a month before Linda Tripp went public about her own "dangerous" predicament, Kathleen Willey reported that her property had been vandalized= - after which a stranger approached her, invoked the names of her children and then said, "I hope you're getting the message?" No doubt this was a bone chilling experience for the widowed Ms. Willey, especially after she had exposed the president on "60 Minutes" as a crude sexual predator. There were a handful of reports about the threat against Willey, but the press decided it wasn't worth raising a fuss over. The media did a similar tap dance around the case of Juanita Broaddrick, a woman uncovered by detectives working for Paula Jones. Reportedly Jones' investigators tape recorded Broaddrick as she unburdened herself about a traumatic encounter with Clinton when he was Arkansas State Attorney General, an experience that she said turned her life upside down and = caused her to flee to California. Broaddrick would not go into detail, saying she did not want to "re-live" the episode. But two network news divisions, ABC and NBC, spoke to witnesses who recounted Broaddrick's story, as told to them years ago by Broaddrick herself. Back then, according to these witnesses, Broaddrick had claimed Bill Clinton had brutally raped her. NBC's Lisa Myers actually interviewed the nurse who had treated Broaddrick's swollen lips after the attack. ABC identified that nurse as Norma Rogers, and named another witness to whom Broaddrick had confided. Broaddrick hastily issued an affidavit recanting her allegation. But questions remain as to why she changed her story. Nevertheless, the media played dumb. Instead of running down an obviously substantial story, the press blamed attorneys for Paula Jones for leaking such a scurrilous charge. According to the London Telegraph (3/30/98), Ken Starr has subpoenaed all relevant evidence gathered by investigators on = the Broaddrick case, in an effort to determine if Juanita Broaddrick has been silenced by the Clinton attack machine. The list of Clinton scandal witnesses who claim to have been approached by operatives bearing bribes and/or threats is astonishingly long, and promises to grow longer as journalists ignore the phenomenon. Dolly Kyle Browning, a Dallas lawyer who claims a thirty year on-and-off sexual relationship with Clinton, says word was sent via her brother from Clinton consigliere Bruce Lindsey, who warned that the White House would "destroy" her if she didn't keep quiet. Columnist Snow reports in his upcoming piece that Lindsey told Linda Tripp he'd do the same thing to her. Former Clinton girlfriend Sally Perdue says a Clinton operative threatened to break her legs if she didn't lay low during Clinton's first bid for the presidency. Arkansas State Trooper Roger Perry has claimed that he was threatened with physical harm by Trooper Chief Raymond "Buddy" Young unless he kept quiet about what he knew. (In Dec. 1993, Young was captured on an ABC News video taking orders on Troopergate damage control from none other than Bruce Lindsey.) The late James McDougal, who first revealed the Clintons' Whitewater shenanigans to the New York Times, was tape recorded as he told a local Arkansas politico that he could sink the Clintons on Whitewater - "if I could get into a position where I wouldn't get my head beaten off." = Despite McDougal's quote, the mainstream press refuses to report allegations by eyewitnesses that suggest his death earlier this year in a federal prison was a result of mistreatment. Like Tripp, key Whitewater witness David Hale has been threatened by state Democrats with prosecution after cooperating with Ken Starr. Hale told the Associated Press last year that attempts had been made to both bribe and threaten him into silence. And like Tripp, federal prosecutors decided = that Hale needed the protection of an FBI "safe house" while preparing to testify. Another trooper, L.D. Brown, says someone approached him during a recent business trip to England and offered $100,000 to tailor his Whitewater story. Gennifer Flowers' onetime neighbor, Gary Johnson has alleged that he was beaten and left for dead after goons he suspected were sent by Clinton stole videotaped evidence of Clinton's relationship with Flowers. New Republic writer L. J. Davis says he was knocked unconscious in a Little Rock hotel room while researching a story on the Rose Law Firm, after = which he discovered a portion of his notes were missing. All these folks have two things in common. They are still, with the exception of McDougal, very much alive and available to be debriefed by reporters who should be desperately curious about all this. The second similarity they share is that the prestige American press refuses to put their stories in context; to connect the dots, for fear the public will draw the obvious conclusion. As Linda Tripp trembled before the microphones last week, she conjured up visions of another traumatized witness who testified before Starr's grand jury last winter. Betty Currie, the president's personal secretary, looked like a freight train had just hit her, as she cowered amidst a throng of reporters after emerging from her first day of testimony. And in the context of all of the above, common sense suggests that she may have been leaned on like so many witnesses trampled by the Clinton machine before her. Currie had lost a brother in a bizarre car accident that left even local investigators puzzled. Theodore Williams had survived the initial crash, only to dart back onto a Virginia highway on foot -- into the path of an = 18 wheeler (The Richmond Times Dispatch, 12/17/97). The death came around the same time Monica Lewinsky was advised by Clinton to return the gifts he gave her (incriminating evidence of their relationship) to Mrs. Currie. Lewinsky has already informed Starr about this episode of Clinton evidence tampering. If Currie corroborates her account, the Clinton presidency is toast. That wasn't the first time in recent months tragedy had struck the Currie family. Another brother had been severely beaten and hospitalized on the eve of Mrs. Currie's August 1997 testimony before the Thompson Committee. After the beating, White House lawyers advised Currie to postpone her testimony (The Oregonian, 1/28/98). Neither the car accident nor the beating seems connected in any way to Currie's role as a crucial witness -- except through the incredibly coincidental timing. But this much is clear. If there is any connection between Betty Currie's twin tragedies and testimony that the White House knows could be legally fatal for the president, America's mainstream media won't uncover it. Because, as with the death threats against Linda Tripp, our journalists = are loathe to expose their own role as accomplices who stood by silently as Bill Clinton wreaked havoc on the American justice system. A Representative of the People Interview With Rep. James Traficant, D-OH. "We need to tone down our governments, against Linda Tripp, our journalists= are loathe to expose their own role as accomplices who stood by silently = as Bill Clinton wreaked havoc on the American justice system. [LISTEN TO "CARL OF OYSTER BAY" LIVE ON THE INTERNET this Thursday, 6:00-8:00 PM EDT. Carl Limbacher is co-hosting on John Sipos', My Town Tampa Bay, heard daily along Florida's Gulf Coast. Listen in RealAudio at: http://www.broadcast.com/radio/news/whnz/ ] Published in the Aug. 3, 1998 issue of The Washington Weekly Copyright = 1998 The Washington Weekly (http://www.federal.com) Reposting permitted with this message intact http://www.Vigo-Examiner.com TEXT VERSION Enjoy a free 90 day trial subscription to The Vigo Examiner. You will receive one to three of our top articles each day. =20 Send your subscription request, and all other communication to Editor@Vigo-Examiner.com. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: Head's Up - Intellectual Ammo Date: 05 Aug 1998 14:12:54 -0600 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Wed, 05 Aug 1998 13:22:16 -0600 Received: from fs1.mainstream.net by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id NAA05007; Wed, 5 Aug 1998 13:11:12 -0600 Received: (from smap@localhost) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id PAA25035; Wed, 5 Aug 1998 15:20:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1) by fs1.mainstream.net via smap (V1.3) id sma024787; Wed Aug 5 15:18:23 1998 Message-Id: <35C88ECC.218E@tidalwave.net> Errors-To: listproc@mainstream.com Reply-To: globallaw@tidalwave.net Originator: noban@mainstream.net Sender: noban@Mainstream.net Precedence: bulk X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Heads Up Shooters. This just in. =20 Without a doubt, anti-RKBA types are going to stroke this school and Capitol Hill thing, as they have for any incident they wished to exploit to get rid of that pesky Second Amendment. Nestled within the newsprint is the name Lois Fingerhut, the author of a series of studies on youth violence. I have not read her reports in depth, but a quick MetaSearch pulled up some references. =20 At first blush, it appears that she is a favorite of the Anti-gunners. Please take a look at the stuff below and get ready for some LTE's. Note: the two last citations are Must Reads -> Great Intellectual Ammo! [Re: Original Intent and Anti-RKBA methods of attacking the RKBA] Semper Fi, Rick V. Yahoo! News - Top Stories Headlines=20 Tuesday August 4 6:41 PM EDT=20 Experts issue mixed report card on violence in U.S. By Michael Conlon=20 CHICAGO (Reuters) - Experts issued a mixed report card on violence in the United States Tuesday: Fewer young people are being murdered but domestic violence involving attacks on women may be worse than recognized.=20 "Homicide rates have recently begun declining among persons 15 through 24 years old, the age group where rates have been the highest and in which the most rapid increase ... from 1987 through 1991 was experienced," said one report from the National Center for Health Statistics.=20 The drops involve both firearm and non-firearm homicides, are taking place in both metropolitan and nonmetropolitan areas among white and black males and females, it added.=20 "While the data shows a decline in homicide rates for young adults and adolescents in every subgroup studied, there is a significant decline for 15- to 24-year-old black males, a group for which homicide continues to be the No. 1 leading cause of death," the report said.=20 [article snipped for brevity] The study was one of several published in this week's Journal of the American Medical Association, an issue devoted to various forms of violence.=20 Lois Fingerhut, a lead author of the study, said that while the research focused on statistics and not causes, law enforcement officials and others have cited a number of reasons for the dropping homicide rates.=20 "They've credited changes in the judicial system, higher incarceration rates, changing drug markets and the stabilization of them and a lot of community activism with people getting tired of violence and working to take back their neighborhoods," she told Reuters.=20 [What? No credit for Right-to-Carry reform?] Asked if those opposed to further gun control efforts would cite the report and others showing crime declines in some major cities as proving that no additional restrictions are needed, she said "that is a danger."=20= "But one of the key messages I want people to take home is that this is no time for complacency. Our efforts need to be redoubled. The (homicide) rates are not nearly as low as they were in 1987," she said.=20 The study found that between 1993 and 1995 firearm homicide rates in the 15 to 24 age group declined an average of 8 percent per year in the biggest metropolitan areas and by more than 15 percent in medium metropolitan areas.=20 "Provisional data for 1996 and 1997 indicate that the national declines in homicide are continuing," it said. "Firearms continue to be the mechanism with which most homicides are committed, with the proportion of homicides resulting from the use of firearms increasing from 66 percent in 1985 to 84 percent of all homicides in 1995."=20 http://dailynews.yahoo.com/headlines/top_stories/story.html?s=3Dz/reuters/9= 80804/news/stories/violence_2.html > University of Toronto holdings:=20 [Say..wasn't Reno just talking about Toronto?] Fingerhut, Lois A. "International and Interstate Comparisons of Homicide Among Young Males." JAMA 263 (June 1990): 3292-5. BMES Fingerhut, Lois A. "Homicide Among Adolescents in the United States." JAMA 266 (Oct 1991): 2223. BMES http://library.utoronto.ca/www/libraries_crim/juvhom.htm Violence Policy Center [Anti-RKBA] Favorites: Fingerhut, Lois, MA and Joel C. Kleinman, PhD, "International and Interstate Comparisons of Homicide Among Young Males," JAMA, June 27, 1990, Vol. 263, No. 24. Fingerhut, Lois, MA, et al, "Firearm and Nonfirearm homicide Among Persons 15 Through 19 Years of Age: Differences by Level of Urbanization, United States, 1979 Through 1989," JAMA, June 10, 1992, Vol. 267, No. 22. [...and our old buddy Kellermann...] Kellermann, Arthur L. and Roberta K. Lee et al, "The Epidemiological Basis for the Prevention of Firearm Injuries," Annual Review of Public Health, Vol. 12, 1991, pp. 17-40. http://www.vpc.org/ytopic.htm Beacons of Hope: New York City's School-Based Community Centers. Series: NIJ Program Focus Published: January 1996=20 - Daniel McGillis (cites to Fingerhut study) http://www.ncjrs.org/txtfiles/beacons.txt ACHTUNG!! [THESE ARE MUST READ(S)!!!] UNDER FIRE: THE NEW CONSENSUS ON THE SECOND AMENDMENT=20 Randy E. Barnett, Don B. Kates =20 http://www.2ndlawlib.org/journals/bk-ufire.html THE FEDERAL FACTOID FACTORY ON FIREARMS AND VIOLENCE: A Review of CDC Research and Politics, Blackman, NRA-ILA 1994 "From proving that firearms exist and are sometimes misused, the CDC=20 regularly presumes that any and all restrictions on firearms -- self- or government-imposed -- would benefit individuals and society. To enhance that conclusion, the CDC produces research showing bad things associated with firearms, based on a fairly open anti-gun bias (Blackman, 1990:2-4): "The Public Health Service [parent agency of the CDC] has targeted violence as a priority concern....There is a separate objective to reduce the number of handguns in private ownership...." (Fingerhut and Kleinman, 1989:6)=20 http://www.nra.org/pub/ila/95-09-23_federal_factoid_factory_on_firearms_and= _violence - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Will Thompson Subject: Janet, part of "the most ethical administration in histroy" Date: 06 Aug 1998 13:43:30 -0600 From UPI.... The House panel probing campaign fund raising has voted to hold Attorney General Janet Reno in contempt of Congress.The vote was 24-19, along party lines. Reno has refused to give Burton memos including one from FBI Director Louis Freeh that urge her to recommend an independent counsel investigate alleged fund-raising abuses. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Will Thompson Subject: Or was that "parts of the constitution"? Date: 06 Aug 1998 15:05:32 -0600 After swearing to uphold and protect the Constitution of the United States..... Thursday August 6 1:50 PM EDT Clinton: Gun waiting period should stay WASHINGTON, Aug. 6 (UPI) - President Clinton is warning Congress he will oppose ``any legislation that would gut the Brady law,'' the anti- handgun law named for former press secretary James Brady. In the Rose Garden today, with Brady once again at his side, Clinton called for making permanent the waiting period, which expires at the end of November, and vowed, ``I will oppose any legislation that would gut the Brady law and put guns back into the hands of felons and fugitives when we can prevent it.'' Clinton is supporting legislation that would require a minimum three- day waiting period for all handgun purchases and add up to two additional days if needed. With Vice President Al Gore, Attorney General Janet Reno and Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin also on hand, Clinton said the law has obviously worked since taking effect in 1994, preventing some 250,000 handgun purchases. But he said: ``We should resolve to do better. No serious person believes this country is as safe as it ought to be.'' ``We cannot retreat,'' Clinton said. ``Yet...that is precisely what the gun lobby and its allies on Capitol Hill have asked us to do _ to retreat from a law that is keeping guns out of the hands of criminals.'' He was referring to a recent amendment to the Senate Commerce- Justice-State appropriations bill that the White House says would undermine nationwide background checks. Officials say it would prohibit the FBI from charging gun dealers a fee for background checks, without which the bureau would have to skip processing millions of such checks. Clinton has often summoned Brady, and his wife, Sarah, to the White House for appearances on behalf of the legislation, which passed after many attempts following the 1981 assassination attempt on President Reagan in which Brady was seriously wounded. Rubin said the administration would soon move to expand the law to cover so-called long guns, such as rifles and shotguns, and require background checks for pawn shop customers who redeem their own firearms. Copyright 1998 by United Press International. All rights reserved. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: Counterterrorism Fund 1/3 Date: 07 Aug 1998 06:32:00 -0700 Search down to 2002 Winter Olympics. Do they have a chemical or biological attack scheduled for the 2002 Olympics, or is this a bribe to the University of Utah? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Cc: David Rydel 5 August 1998 Excerpted from Senate Report 105-235 July 2, 1998 105th Congress DEPARTMENTS OF COMMERCE, JUSTICE, AND STATE, THE JUDICIARY, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATION BILL, 1999 TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ***** Counterterrorism Fund (including transfer of funds) Appropriations, 1998.................................... $52,700,000 Budget estimate, 1999................................... 61,703,000 Committee recommendation................................ 193,999,000 The Committee recommends $193,999,000 for the ``Counterterrorism fund'' account which was established in Public Law 104-19, the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Additional Disaster Assistance, for Anti-Terrorism Initiatives, for Assistance in the Recovery from the Tragedy that Occurred at Oklahoma City, and Rescissions Act, 1995. The recommendation provides $132,296,000 more than the request and $141,299,000 above the 1998 appropriation. This fund is under the control and direction of the Attorney General to: (1) cover the costs incurred in reestablishing the operational capability of an office or facility which has been damaged or destroyed as a result of any domestic or international terrorist incident; (2) the costs of providing support to counter, investigate, or prosecute domestic or international terrorism, including payment of rewards in connection with these activities; (3) the costs of conducting a terrorism threat assessment of Federal agencies and their facilities; (4) the costs associated with ensuring the continuance of essential Government functions during a time of emergency; and (5) the costs for activities related to the protection of the Nation's critical infrastructure. Counterterrorism initiative.--The administration is starting to realize the threat of terrorists using considerable destructive power on individuals, institutions, and facilities. The Committee is especially concerned with the threat of chemical and biological weapons. The requirements placed upon officials from Federal, State, city, and community agencies are complicated and in many cases unfunded. Most Federal, State, city, and community agencies do not have civil response assets needed to address such a threat or event. These assets include the equipment and training needed to address the demands of terrorist threats or events. The Committee also recognizes that domestic disaster relief is part of each State's responsibility for public safety. The Committee's goals include providing States with an improved ability to respond to terrorist threats or events. This includes training and equipping the first responder who will respond within 1 hour of a threat or event. The Committee is also aware of the State's rapid assessment and initial detection [RAID] elements that are expected to arrive within 6 to 8 hours after an event has occurred. They will assist in confirming the nature of an attack. However, the use of weapons of mass destruction [WMD] could create a situation which is outside the response capabilities of local law enforcement. The role of the Department of Justice is to manage crises that are caused by domestic terrorists. This includes the ability to prevent or resolve an act of terrorism. The fiscal year 1998 conference report directed the Attorney General to develop a 5-year interdepartmental counterterrorism and technology crime plan. The plan covers a broad range of topics encompassing the Nation's efforts to prevent and deter terrorist attacks, as well as manage a crisis created by a terrorist incident. It is to serve as a baseline strategy for coordination of national policy and operational capabilities to combat terrorism. This effort is in accord with Presidential Decision Directive 62. The final plan is due no later than December 31, 1998. Last year, the conferees provided $1,000,000 for the preparation of this plan. On March 3, 1998, the Department provided an initial prospectus outlining the basic topics to be considered in the course of developing the plan with estimated time lines and major milestones for completion of the plan. The prospectus outlines a comprehensive strategy which covers the prevention of, and the reaction to, terrorist events both inside and outside the United States. It also addresses the safeguarding of our information infrastructure and the research and development of critical technologies used in combating terrorism. The goal of the Committee is to create a coordinated posture with respect to our national efforts to combat terrorism. The Committee understands that working groups have been developing specific 5-year objectives to be included in a draft plan. The subject area of these recommendations include: prevention and deterrence; crisis management; consequence management; cyberterrorism; critical technologies; and research and development. The Committee expects field meetings be held to refine the draft plan. The purpose of these meetings is to consult with State and local authorities and interested members of the academic community to obtain input for the plan. The Committee continues to emphasize the importance of input and consultation from State and local authorities, and the academic and private sectors. In consultation with the Office of Management and Budget [OMB], the Coordinating Subgroup on Counterterrorism and key agencies, a final plan should be completed by November 31, 1998. The plan should be presented to the Attorney General for approval and submitted to the appropriate committees no later than December 31, 1998. The Committee looks forward to submission of a comprehensive final product that will serve as a baseline strategy and budget document for coordination of national policy and operational capabilities to combat terrorism. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: Counterterrorism Fund 2/3 Date: 07 Aug 1998 06:32:00 -0700 The Committee commends the Attorney General for her efforts in this process. However, the Committee is concerned with the burdensome process that has been created. The Department has given direct roles to the following agencies: Federal Emergency Management Agency, National Security Agency, Public Health Service, Environmental Protection Agency, Federal Aviation Administration, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, General Services Administration, U.S. Information Agency, Department of Transportation, and Department of Commerce. While many of these agencies have a significant role to play, others do not. It has been estimated that 20 different agencies are involved. As a result, information has been leaked to the media and the process has become burdensome. The Committee urges the Attorney General to conduct an immediate review of the process and in consultation with the Appropriations Committees make appropriate changes. Also, the Committee expects the final plan will contain budget data appropriate for inclusion in the fiscal year 2000 appropriations bills. To advance this effort the Committee recommendation includes language which allows the Attorney General to better manage and coordinate the funding requirements needed for crisis management. Improving State and local response capabilities.--The Committee recommendation includes $197,000,000 within the counterterrorism fund to enable the Office of Justice Programs [OJP] to expand first responder training and equipment program activities. The grant funds available in this program will be targeted to the 157 largest cities and localities in the United States, as well as States. These first responders will be designated by the appropriate local governments. The Committee notes the National Domestic Preparedness Consortium was designed to address and sustain comprehensive and coordinated efforts to respond to incidents of terrorism. This will be done through certification programs, technical assistance, distance learning, test and evaluation, and realistic confidence building exercises based on threat-driven scenarios. The goal of the consortium is to provide a threat responsive, long-term national capability. This capability will be attained through weapons of mass destruction [WMD] emergency first responder training, test, and exercise programs. The consortium should concentrate on using its existing training facilities and staff. This collaborative effort is intended to achieve the most immediate enhancement of local, State, and Federal emergency first responders and emergency management agencies nationwide. The consortium members include the National Energetic Materials Research and Testing Center, New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology; the National Center for Bio-Med Research and Training, Louisiana State University; the Center for Domestic Preparedness, Fort McClellan, AL; the National Emergency Response and Rescue Training Center, Texas A&M University; and the National Exercise, Test, and Training Center, Nevada test site. The Committee is aware of and supportive of OJP's administration of this program. This program includes an equipment purchasing program and two training programs. It will address the unmet needs of our Nation's first responders by providing equipment and training to efficiently and safely respond to incidents of terrorism, including those involving nuclear, biological, and chemical agents; explosive devices; and other weapons of mass destruction. OJP expects to accomplish the following activities by the close of fiscal year 1998: (1) offer the first responder basic concepts course to over 74,000 firefighters and emergency medical services personnel in 120 jurisdictions nationwide; (2) award equipment grants, totaling $12,000,000, to 46 State and local first responder agencies for the purpose of outfitting these agencies with basic protective gear and equipment; (3) establish the State and local training center for first responders at Fort McClellan, AL; and (4) award a $2,000,000 grant to the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology for the development of a curriculum to train local law enforcement personnel to respond to incidents of terrorism. The Committee recommends the following program increases for fiscal year 1999: 1998 1999 budget Committee appropriation estimate recommendation Metropolitan medical strike teams training and equipment.... ............... $9,000,000 $5,000,000 Establishment of a Local Law Enforcement Training Program... ............... 7,000,000 7,000,000 Expansion of the equipment acquisition program.............. $12,000,000 73,500,000 95,000,000 Administration.......................................... ............... ............... (2,000,000) Implementation of situational exercises..................... ............... ............... 10,000,000 Technical assistance/national needs assessment.............. ............... 10,000,000 10,000,000 For consortium members: Center for Domestic Preparedness, Fort McClellan, AL.... 2,000,000 5,000,000 12,000,000 National Energetic Materials Research and Testing Center, New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology.. 2,000,000 ............... 2,500,000 National Emergency Response and Rescue Training Center, Texas A&M University................................... ............... ............... 2,500,000 National Exercise, Test and Training Center, Nevada test site................................................... ............... ............... 2,500,000 National Center for Bio-Med Research and Training, Louisiana State University............................. ............... ............... 2,500,000 State and local detection/bomb technician equipment......... ............... 49,000,000 23,000,000 Municipal fire and emergency services....................... ............... ............... 25,000,000 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: Counterterrorism Fund 3/3 Date: 07 Aug 1998 06:32:00 -0700 Should the funds be available in the Department of Justice working capital fund, the Committee directs the Attorney General to provide $23,000,000 for State and local detection/ bomb technician equipment. The Committee finds that the Department of Justice's Office of Justice Programs [OJP] currently does not have a plan to develop simulations of complex, nonlinear phenomena, such as dispersion and deposition of chemical or biological aerosols for the 2002 Winter Olympics. The Committee directs the Department to explore this possibility, employing the services of the University of Utah which is the Nation's lead institution in the National Science Foundation Science and Technology Center for Computer Graphics. The Committee also notes that the Department of Defense is expected to commit additional funding for this counterterrism effort in fiscal year 1999 pursuant to the Nunn-Lugar-Domenici Program authorized in Public Law 104-201. Improving municipal fire and emergency services.--The Committee recommendation includes $25,000,000 to improve municipal fire and emergency services. This new program will ensure municipal fire and emergency services departments are provided with appropriate equipment necessary to respond to incidents of terrorism involving the release of chemical, biological, and radiological agents, as well as improvised or manufactured explosive devices. The Committee recommendation includes $17,000,000 for grants of equipment directly to local fire departments, hazardous materials response teams, and emergency medical service agencies, and $8,000,000 for grants for interoperable radio equipment to local emergency response agencies. The Committee's recommendation also includes $7,000,000 for grants to firefighters and emergency service personnel within the ``Justice assistance'' account. Topoff exercise.--The Committee commends the administration for its efforts to enhance our ability to prevent and respond to chemical, biological, and cyberweapon attacks. The Committee is aware that numerous exercises are conducted each year to practice operations in the event of a terrorist incident. The Committee understands that few of the top officials of agencies have ever fully participated in these exercises. The Committee directs that an exercise be conducted in fiscal year 1999 with the participation of all key personnel who would participate in the consequence management of such an actual terrorist event. The decision on what type of simulated attack should be based upon the ability to best address one of these three threats. This exercise should be cochaired and administered without notice by the Attorney General and the Administrator of FEMA and coordinated with the National Security Council. Cyberterrorism.--The Committee understands that today our U.S. economy and even our continuing national security is heavily reliant on a vast array of interdependent and critical infrastructures. The Report of the President's Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection in October 1997 and Presidential Decision Directive No. 63, released in May 1998, call for an unprecedented level of cooperation among U.S. Federal law enforcement agencies, national security entities and the private sector owners and operators to reduce the threat of information age crime, terrorism and possibility of a cyber attack. The Committee strongly encourages and expects all Federal agencies to cooperate to the full extent of their authorities and expertise in the response planning, prevention, detection, deterrence, and elimination of vulnerabilities to these critical infrastructures. The Committee further encourages all Federal entities to ensure that resources required to protect critical infrastructures and pursue information age criminals and terrorists are given a high priority within respective programs and initiatives. Today, the potential for an Internet crime wave is staggering. Programs are available which provide marginally skilled people with the tools to threaten national security. These efforts can be contained by simple methods. The Committee urges the FBI to provide guidelines for all agencies within the Department. These guidelines should include the enforcement of strict password policies, employment of firewalls between agency networks and the outside world, the use of encryption, and the reporting of break-ins. Presidential Decision Directive 63 [PDD-63].--The Committee supports PDD-63 in its efforts to address threats to physical and cyberbased critical infrastructure. The Committee notes the requirement by PDD-63 that the Department develop a plan for protecting its own critical infrastructure, including but not limited to its cyberbased systems. This plan should be provided to the Committee no later than August 31, 1998. In addition to this plan the Committee directs the Department to include the necessary legislative authorities and fiscal year 2000 budgetary priorities necessary to begin implementing this plan. National Infrastructure Protection Center [NIPC].--The Committee recommendation includes $26,984,000 for the National Infrastructure Protection Center. The recommendation does not include $6,619,000 for other infrastructure protection projects. Should the funds be available in the Department of Justice working capital fund, the Committee directs the Attorney General to provide $7,985,000 for the National Infrastructure Protection Center [NIPC]. Continuation of operations [COOP]/continuity of government [COG].--The Committee recommendation includes $1,000,000 for the continuation of operations/continuity of government for an alternate crisis management/relocation facility to carry on essential Department of Justice functions in the event the Department, or one of its components, is denied access to its facility for various reasons, such as a terrorist act. The recommendation is $2,100,000 less than the fiscal year 1999 request due to updated funding requirements. The Committee is aware that there are carryover balances from fiscal years 1997 and 1998 in excess of $50,000,000. This amount is adequate to fund the statutory provisions provided in fiscal years 1997-98 counterterrorism fund. The Committee directs the Department of Justice to continue to notify the House and Senate Appropriations Committees prior to obligations of funds. ***** Cybercrime.--Traffic on the Internet continues to rise, yet security controls remain totally inadequate. As a result, the information superhighway has become an avenue for embezzlement, fraud, theft, sabotage, espionage, hate crimes, and pornography. Within available resources and manpower ceilings, the Committee recommendation provides $3,630,000 (and 18 full- time equivalents) for cybercrime prosecutions. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: "Anti-Brady" amendment Date: 07 Aug 1998 19:27:00 -0700 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- The Michigan Militia Corps' WEEKLY UPDATE **Internet Edition** Volume 5 Issue 25 Week of July 20, 1998 [Other articles snipped] Hats off to GOA members and activists for their tremendous efforts! By Gun Owners of America http://www.gunowners.org (Wednesday, July 22, 1998) As we told you to expect, Sen. Bob Smith (R-NH) introduced his "Anti-Brady" amendment as a rider to the StateJustice-Commerce Appropriations bill (S. 2260) yesterday. The amendment passed overwhelmingly, and, unless it's stripped out in a conference committee, the amendment should become law later this year! The Smith amendment would do three things. As explained by Smith himself yesterday: Stated simply, my legislation will put a stop to the FBI's plan to keep records of private identifying information on law-abiding citizens who buy guns. . . . Why would we want the FBI to maintain a file on a law-abiding gun owner who did nothing [except] exercise his constitutional right to own a gun? They want 18 months to keep these files. I don't want 18 seconds. I want these files destroyed immediately. That is point one in my amendment. . . . Secondly, the amendment prevents the FBI from imposing a tax on these people. Thirdly, it allows a person to go to court if the FBI does that. We have seen abuses by the FBI. We have seen files held in the White House. Do you want this to go on? That is what this issue is about. That is what my amendment is about. Members and activists of Gun Owners of America deserve a lot of credit for this victory. Smith's staff has told GOA that during the past month, they have seen boxes of postcards come in to the Senate in favor of his amendment. Your other contacts were also helpful in overcoming some institutional opposition in the Senate. High-level Senate sources reported that NRA lobbyists were "camped out" in the Senate cloakroom, pushing an alternative to the Smith amendment. They were concerned that Smith's amendment was too tough and that it didn't have enough votes to pass. But despite these objections, your grassroots efforts prevailed! Indeed, Senator Smith's amendment is tougher than other bills that try to stop the FBI from registering gun owners. Smith's proviso actually allows individuals to "punish" the FBI by suing them for any infringement of privacy (i.e., gun owner registration), and then recover all the attorney's fees that one spends on the lawsuit. Strange coalition forms to back Smith amendment Sen. Smith's amendment would, obviously, benefit gun owners first and foremost. But Sen. Smith also appealed to those Democrats who were interested in the issue of privacy. "This is more than a gun issue," he told his colleagues. "This is a privacy issue [as well]." The privacy issue can often cut across party lines. Some liberal, Democratic Senators voted with Smith purely because of the privacy implications. And thus, Smith was able to garner a filibuster-proof and veto-proof majority. To make matters simpler, we have listed the 31 "bad" Senators who voted AGAINST Smith: Akaka (HI), Kohl (WI) Biden (DE), Landrieu (LA), Boxer (CA), Lautenberg (NJ) Bryan (NV), Levin (MI), Bumpers (AR), Lieberman (CT), Byrd (WV), Mikulski (MD), Cleland (GA), Moseley-Braun (IL), Dodd (CT), Moynihan (NY) Durbin (IL), Reed (RI), Feinstein (CA), Robb (VA), Ford (KY), Sarbanes (MD), Glenn (OH), Torricelli (NJ), Graham (FL), Wellstone (MN), Harkin (IA), Wyden (OR), Inouye (HI), Kennedy (MA), Kerry (MA) Fight moves to the House The House version of the Commerce-State-Justice appropriation bill will be coming up for a vote soon. GOA will keep you updated on our efforts to attach a Smith-type amendment on the House bill. Doing so would help guarantee that a HouseSenate conference committee will not strip the amendment from the bill. *** If you would like to submit an editorial, commentary, or news story from your perspective on something you have been keeping an eye on, please e-mail it to update@militia.gen.mi.us and it will be evaluated for entrance. Thanks. To subscribe to the Weekly Update, put out weekly by Michigan Militia Corps 5th Division command, simply send a message to majordom@lists.cns.net with the phrase "subscribe militia" in the BODY of the message. The Weekly Update is archived at the Michigan Militia Corps web page at: http://militia.gen.mi.us Jeff S. 15th Brigade: Kent county 5th Division Michigan Militia Corps - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: Projections on Y2K Date: 08 Aug 1998 08:16:00 -0700 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Had to pass this post along to you'all. The last paragraph is quite amusing. Best, Mike Lamb ========================================= Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion Newsgroups: misc.survivalism Compadres, Another very good post from AR-15 mailing list with good Y2K technical info and an amusing last line. Ed Hill, Atlanta First off, I am a senior software engineer in Silicon Valley and am very familiar with these issues. There are a lot of aspects of Y2K that a lot of people on this list don't seem to be comprehending. First is that the primary effects of a Y2K failure are *not* the most destructive. The problem is the secondary effects. By secondary effects, I am talking about the impact on the systems that depend on the smaller number of systems that fail. Here is an example: All checks in the U.S. banking system go through one of seven automated clearing houses that run 24/7. If any one of these mainframes goes down for more than a single hour, the entire bank checking system will be unrecoverable due to the volume. Now imagine what it would do to the banks if the entire check clearinghouse systems collapsed in an unrecoverable manner. But not to worry, the U.S. banking software will most likely be Y2K compliant, I am told by my friends who happen to be working on the problem. Unfortunately, most of the European systems and the majority of Asian banking systems will *not* be ready. The reason this is especially bad is that a Y2K failure at a European or Asian bank will very likely cause a secondary failure in the U.S. banking software because all the banks are interconnected and interdependent on each other's data. The U.S. banks are extremely concerned about this but there is little they can do. Now apply this example to your industry of choice. A very small number of failures will topple the house of cards. And because this is a data and software issue, it can affect *all* computers, not just mainframes. Remember earlier this year when a software bug in two Cisco routers killed 40% of the U.S. data network capacity for a day? ATMs stopped working, banks lost their computer capability, and businesses were unable to conduct transactions. And it only required a software failure on two machines. For the record, the so-called "Great Geek Migration" is a real phenomenon. Based on my personal experience, I would estimate that 10% of the software engineers in Silicon Valley are looking at serious bugout/survival preparation. It is considered no joke here. While no one knows what will happen (many system failures *will* occur but the amount of damage is pure speculation), enough people here are risk averse enough to make preparations. And don't even get me started on the possibility of "work camp internment" by FEMA as allowed by EO. At best things will be uncomfortable for a while. It does warm the heart, though, to have left-wing, grass-eating, gun hating co-workers asking me for advice on the purchase of their first gun in preparation for Y2K. I guess the RKBA wasn't important to them until it was their ass on the line... -James Rogers jamesr@best.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: Forbidden Words Date: 10 Aug 1998 07:44:00 -0700 Forbidden Words http://www.fatalblindness.com August 9, 1998 Fulton Huxtable Here is something you may not know. If you don't, you are not alone, since most Americans appear to be completely unaware of it. And the reason most do not know it is that the media hasn't provided the details. What is "it"? The fact that legislation recently passed the House that would forbid you to use certain words, during the 60-day period prior to a general election, in any "type of general public communication." It would be illegal for you to engage in "a communication that advocates the election or defeat of a candidate by-(i) containing a phrase such as `vote for', `re-elect', `support', `cast your ballot for', `(name of candidate) for Congress', (name of candidate) in 1997', `vote against', `defeat', `reject' or a campaign slogan or words that in context can have no reasonable meaning other than to advocate the election or defeat of 1 or more clearly identified candidates;" (Title II, Sec. 201 (b) (20) (A). Welcome to the hoped-for, totalitarian world of the Shays-Meehan bill, pleasingly touted to the public as the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act. This Act does not stop with merely banning the use of certain words in any public forum, during the 60 days before a general election, it makes a sweeping ban of "...a communication that advocates the election or defeat of a candidate by-(iii) expressing unmistakable or unambiguous support for or opposition to 1 or more clearly identified candidates when taken as a whole and with limited reference to external events, such as proximity to an election." (Title II, Sec. 201 (b) (20) (A) (iii)). If this legislation is signed into law it will bring widespread, forcible suppression of freedom of expression, suddenly putting into high gear what has, so far, been a slow-motion death march toward totalitarian rule in America. Even though statists claim that these restrictions would only apply to ads coming from such groups as the Sierra Club or the NRA, consider the possibilities which will be offered to statists and the power they will have against anyone who opposes them. With the power to ban any "...communication.expressing unmistakable and unambiguous support...," logic, as logic always does, will drive statists to take this to its ultimate conclusion. Just what might be the target of statist regulators? Anything and everything: every means of communication would eventually become subject to regulation. How about your web site? It certainly is a means of communication. How about your postings to an online discussion forum or newsgroup? Yep, this would qualify as communication. What if you have a list of individuals to whom you e-mail political messages? This, too, would be a communication. In fact, virtually any form of public expression, anything you might say for the purpose of influencing the outcome of an election-a letter to the editor of a newspaper, a telephone call to a talk radio show or a speech given to a group of individuals-would be banned during the 60 days prior to a general election. This legislation would also mean that for the 60 days prior to a general election, no newspaper, magazine or any other publication could issue an editorial either for or against a candidate. Talk radio show hosts, such as Rush Limbaugh, would effectively be silenced for 60 days. There would essentially be no public utterances for or against candidates during 60 days of suppression, except, of course, for the candidates themselves, their political parties and their representatives. According to news reports, the Shays-Meehan bill is given little chance of passing the Senate, but there are only a half-a-dozen or so Senators standing in the way of its passage-that is how close America is to taking one, gigantic step closer to full-blown totalitarianism. What if there are a few changes in the makeup of the Senate in the coming, November elections, changes that alter the philosophic mix of the Senate, making it even more statist than it is now? What if those now standing in the way of the passage of Shays-Meehan are no longer in office? Given the penchant of most Americans to only judge legislation by its cover and the unconscionable editorial support it has received from most newspapers, most will rally around this Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act and will only discover the meaning of their act of support after it is too late. Once statists succeed in establishing censorship for 60 days prior to elections, the collapse of freedom will accelerate with startling swiftness. Statists will soon claim that 60 days isn't long enough, that these restrictions on speech need to be extended and they will call for these extensions during the 60 days of silence, when no one can effectively speak out against them, when only statist politicians can speak and run their ads to influence opinion-and they will get that extension, one that will go to 120 days, then to a year before any election, then to a total ban on public expression for or against a candidate. I have repeatedly warned that America will quickly collapse into complete totalitarian rule shortly after freedom of speech is sharply restricted-and we are now within sight of such restrictions on speech being imposed in the very near future. It could only be a year or two away, or it could be longer-or, if enough act now, it will never happen. (If you are relying on the Supreme Court to save the First Amendment, don't bet your life on it. For decades, the Supreme Court has been sanctioning the nibbling away of the First Amendment.) The passage in the House of the Shays-Meehan bill should be a wake-up call to anyone who values his freedom. The alarm bells should be ringing. There should be a storm of protests. Alarmingly, there are no alarms and no storms of protest-at least, not yet. While you still have the freedom to do so, you had better act now, speak out while you still have the freedom to do so. If you don't, statists will eventually see to it that your voluntary silence now will become involuntary silence in the future. Fulton Huxtable August 9, 1998 Rose Bowen Prophetic Secrets and the New World Order Will they affect your life??? http://www.sayhello.com/secrets - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: jwaldron@halcyon.com Subject: Re: Forbidden Words Date: 10 Aug 1998 09:34:32 -0700 (PDT) On Mon, 10 Aug 98, scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) wrote: > >Forbidden Words >http://www.fatalblindness.com > >August 9, 1998 Fulton Huxtable > >Here is something you may not know. If you don't, you >are not alone, since most Americans appear to be >completely unaware of it. And the reason most do not >know it is that the media hasn't provided the details. > >What is "it"? The fact that legislation recently passed the >House that would forbid you to use certain words, during >the 60-day period prior to a general election, in any "type >of general public communication." It would be illegal for >you to engage in "a communication that advocates the >election or defeat of a candidate by-(i) containing a >phrase such as `vote for', `re-elect', `support', `cast your >ballot for', `(name of candidate) for Congress', (name of >candidate) in 1997', `vote against', `defeat', `reject' or a >campaign slogan or words that in context can have no >reasonable meaning other than to advocate the election >or defeat of 1 or more clearly identified candidates;" >(Title II, Sec. 201 (b) (20) (A). This is such a gross violation of exactly the kind of speech the First Amendment was written to protect that I'll go out on a limb and state up front that it will never pass constitutional muster. (Then again, according to "Miller," the assault weapon ban should be clearly unconstitutional, as well, as that is exactly the class of "arms" protected by the Second.) Joe W - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: Re: Call your congresscritter SVP Date: 10 Aug 1998 14:14:29 -0600 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Sun, 09 Aug 1998 21:13:12 -0600 Received: from fs1.mainstream.net by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id VAA08339; Sun, 9 Aug 1998 21:02:03 -0600 Received: (from smap@localhost) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id XAA25533; Sun, 9 Aug 1998 23:11:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1) by fs1.mainstream.net via smap (V1.3) id sma025463; Sun Aug 9 23:09:12 1998 Message-Id: <35CE61D6.2A7F6B95@inetnebr.com> Errors-To: listproc@mainstream.com Reply-To: lball@inetnebr.com Originator: noban@mainstream.net Sender: noban@Mainstream.net Precedence: bulk X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Some of us have talked about this on Noban. My initial thoughts were = tha=3D t the NRA got blind sided, but I think not. The only two things they are resisting in this act is the Tax and the Registration. They do not care about the long guns; be they shotguns or rifles. Is it time again to ask the NRA - Are you adrift? or are you trying to = t=3D ake us to the same place HCI wishes us to go? Larry Ball lball@inetnebr.com globallaw@tidalwave.net wrote: > Brady Handgun Law To Control All Long Gun Sales > > Industry and Public Basically Unaware of Total Overhaul > > [excerpted] > > "One thing noted by BATF senior counsel Stephen R. Rubenstein, and > clearly stated in the first sentence of the Brady law, is that the > temporary requirements do expire 60 months after enactment (on Nov. > 30, 1998). If the insta-check isn=3D92t up by that time, as Rubenstein > noted, > there will be no Brady requirements in effect at all. > > Whether Congress would allow Brady to lapse is a crucial issue, and > attempts at change are likely. White House spokesperson Rahm Emanuel > has already indicated that Clinton will seek some form of extension to > the expiring first part of the Brady law. The expiration date provides > a leverage point for interested parties. > > Once the new system (dubbed NICS by the FBI) is up, an instant national > accounting of gun-sale volume will flow through FBI hands. Based on > mandatory direct contact, every single purchase, city by city, will be > tabulated. If Cleveland has a big gun show this weekend, it will show. > Maybe Nebraska is slow right now, and those numbers, like election > returns, will be available to law enforcement and others privileged to > view the data. Manufacturers who would love to track real-time = nationa=3D l > sales activity could conceivably do so=3D97though who will have access = to > the information (besides the FBI) is unclear. Daily and summary = report=3D s > will spew out with digital efficiency. It will be like no other sales > data collection system in existence. All this commercial data is being > collected, oddly enough, in the name of stopping crime. > > As sales information comes flooding in, the FBI will move into a new > arena as the largest, most sophisticated warehouse of point-of-sale > records for any product in the world. > > The law requires the Bureau to obtain complete ID on gun buyers, but > then to destroy this information. Collecting and maintaining a file on > the 70 million legitimate gun owners in America has never been done, > has been prohibited by statute since 1986, and is also prohibited > under Brady itself. However, in proposed regs, the FBI has indicated > that they will in fact record every retail gun buyer in America, once > the > system is running, in apparent violation of those laws." > > http://www.usajournal.com/brady_law_about_to_affect_long_g.htm > > PS: Instructions on joining your listserv would be appreciated. > > RV - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: [Fwd: Fwd: POLICE STATE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!] Date: 10 Aug 1998 14:17:47 -0600 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Sat, 08 Aug 1998 14:12:33 -0600 Received: from fs1.mainstream.net by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id OAA07598; Sat, 8 Aug 1998 14:01:20 -0600 Received: (from smap@localhost) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id QAA27030; Sat, 8 Aug 1998 16:10:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1) by fs1.mainstream.net via smap (V1.3) id sma026982; Sat Aug 8 16:10:12 1998 Message-Id: <35CCA3DB.AD65EB11@inetnebr.com> Errors-To: listproc@mainstream.com Reply-To: lball@inetnebr.com Originator: noban@mainstream.net Sender: noban@Mainstream.net Precedence: bulk X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------5BDCCA46E27A76B30171EF55 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dus-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This is in conjunction with the guys who were harrassed in Omaha the other day for carrying "openly" with a permit. Bob Taylor and the others, including the mother and kids of the house they were visiting, were ordered face down on the ground at gun point. We may start something against the police and the city of Omaha over this. You all out there might be asked to contribute some of your "hard earned" and help raise some of the same from others. If the attorney decides to proceed with this we should make this an internet campaign and beat down the forces of tyranny. Getting Hotter, Larry Ball lball@inetnebr.com --------------5BDCCA46E27A76B30171EF55 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: Received: from imo15.mx.aol.com (imo15.mx.aol.com [198.81.17.5]) by falcon.inetnebr.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id BAA27971 for ; Sat, 8 Aug 1998 01:53:57 -0500 (CDT) Received: from Gunlver@aol.com by imo15.mx.aol.com (IMOv14_b1.1) id XSQYa20769; Sat, 8 Aug 1998 02:52:53 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: lball@inetnebr.com, dstock@uswest.net, ttidave@ibm.net, WEwasiuk@aol.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/mixed; boundary=3D"part0_902559173_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 170 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --part0_902559173_boundary Content-ID: <0_902559173@inet_out.mail.aol.com.1> Content-type: text/plain; charset=3DUS-ASCII hey people.....check this out ......this happened to a friend of mine......= . bob --part0_902559173_boundary Content-ID: <0_902559173@inet_out.mail.aol.com.2> Content-type: message/rfc822 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Content-disposition: inline Return-Path: Received: from relay22.mx.aol.com (relay22.mail.aol.com [172.31.106.68]) = by air16.mail.aol.com (v47.2) with SMTP; Fri, 07 Aug 1998 06:14:15 = -0400 Received: from oasis.novia.net (oasis.novia.net [204.248.24.1]) by relay22.mx.aol.com (8.8.8/8.8.5/AOL-4.0.0) with ESMTP id DAA22277 for ; Fri, 7 Aug 1998 03:22:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mbrain (208-149-120-31.novia.net [208.149.120.31]) by oasis.novia.net (8.9.1/Novia) with ESMTP id CAA12268 for ; Fri, 7 Aug 1998 02:22:45 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199808070722.CAA12268@oasis.novia.net> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=3DISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Hey Bob, your story Is familiar to what happened to our Paintball team 2 years ago. We were at Humble Park here in Omaha. Our team had just gone = o=3D ut on ambush and the opposing team was giving us about five minutes before they came hunting for us. All of a sudden we heard brakes screaching, = doo=3D rs closing and alot of yelling, "Get down on the ground!" We came out of the brush and took a look from far away. We saw about four cruisers, cops everywhere with their guns drawn and the other paintball team, which were just kids still In high school, laying on their stomachs with handcuffs = o=3D n! At first we were just going to stay hidden because there's no way they would find us. However, we weren't sure If the other team would say that = =3D we were out there or not. So instead of the cops coming out there looking = fo=3D r us and being PARANOID, which we all know they are and causing an = accident=3D , we decided to come out. It was actually funny because they didn't see us walking toward them. There were 12 of us and we all had paintguns that If they were equivalent to real weapons they would have had firepower of an M-16. My gun shoots 26 paintballs per second at a range of 300 feet per second. Anyway, they were acting all tough like they we SO IN CHARGE and "aware" that It startled them when we spoke. We said stuff like, "Hey?" = "=3D We don't have real guns." "These are paintguns." "Didn't mean to startle = you=3D ." The look on most of there faces was funny because we seemed to just come out of nowhere and we were just 20 feet from them. Then It got REAL. One cop pulled his gun out and yelled at all of us to drop down on the = ground=3D - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: "Post Your Opinion" Date: 10 Aug 1998 15:46:15 -0600 "I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who endowed us with = sense, reason, and intellect had intended for us to forgo their use." --Galileo Galilei - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: Re: Janet Reno Date: 10 Aug 1998 18:07:48 -0600 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Thu, 06 Aug 1998 01:59:20 -0600 Received: from fs1.mainstream.net by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id BAA05544; Thu, 6 Aug 1998 01:48:16 -0600 Received: (from smap@localhost) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id DAA04847; Thu, 6 Aug 1998 03:57:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1) by fs1.mainstream.net via smap (V1.3) id sma004643; Thu Aug 6 03:53:25 1998 Message-Id: <28807a84.35c955cc@aol.com> Errors-To: listproc@mainstream.com Reply-To: BludyRed@aol.com Originator: noban@mainstream.net Sender: noban@Mainstream.net Precedence: bulk X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline In a message dated 98-08-05 16:21:39 EDT, lball@inetnebr.com writes: << This is great material. Can you give me the cite to either download = this report or to be able to go to the library and get a copy? =20 This stuff flies directly into the face of what we have been told.<< I have made some minimal effort to investigate this. Evidently, the ICVS report is available from Statistics Canada for a significant charge. The report received=20 somewhat more attention in England.=20 Here is the cite that brought it to my attention. I verified the article last spring. "The Edmonton Journal" does have a web site as does Statistics Canada. ******* Canadians suffer as much crime as Americans by LORNE GUNTER appeared in the Edmonton Journal 31.3.98 Lost last week by Canadian newspapers and networks, amid their sanctimonious tut-tutting about the mass killing in a Jonesboro, Ark. schoolyard, was the release of The Third International Crime Victimization Survey (ICVS). In part, this is justifiable. Five simultaneous murders is a bigger story than the release of yet another dry statistical report, especially when four of the victims are children and the fifth their pregnant teacher. The shortcoming lies in the Canadian moral clucking surrounding the Jonesboro shootings versus the silence over the implications of the ICVS. The CBC English television network directly blamed the National Rifle Association for the five deaths in Arkansas. To hear its report, one would think NRA vice-president Charlton Heston had had his finger on the trigger. John Bierman of the Financial Post shrieked "It's the gun culture, stupid," which is true in a way, but not the way Bierman means. Then he called on the Americans to emulate Canada or Britain and implement strict controls on guns. Bierman, and several other Canadian commentators who mimicked his knee-jerk reaction, ignore at least three significant points. Canada's gun laws were already quite strict when a madman killed 14 female students at the Universite du Montreal in 1989, and yet the laws did not save them (nor will the even stricter laws being implemented this fall prevent future madmen from committing similar mass killings). Mass killings are committed with machetes, bombs and other weapons, too, and their cause perplexes psychologists and sociologists. And, if the cause of a crime is cultural, a change to gun laws will be virtually powerless to alter it. Which is why it was unforgivable that Canadian journalists should have overlooked the ICVS. Canadians have smug attitudes towards the United States on a number of subjects; health care, welfare and crime among them. While in each case our smugness is undeserved, it is especially undeserved on crime. Like several studies before it, the ICVS shows that except for murder, Canadians suffer as much violent crime as Americans, and more non-violent crime. Our view of all America as the final shootout from a John Wayne movie and all Canada as an idyllic scene from Anne of Green Gables is simplistic, arrogant and wrong; it borders on outright prejudice. According to the ICVS, which is conducted here by Statistics Canada, 25 percent of Canadians were the victim of a crime in 1996 versus 24 per cent of Americans. Six per cent of Canucks suffered a violent crime `a robbery, armed robbery, sexual assault or common assault' versus seven percent of Americans. The highest incidence of violent crime in the industrialized world was in England and Wales, where eight per cent of residents were victimized in 1996 (and total victimization is 40 per cent higher than in the U.S.) and where gun laws are even stricter than in Canada. Household burglaries and car thefts were as high in Canada as in the U.S (in England and France they were 50 per cent higher than in North America), with the added proviso that burglaries in Canada are more than four times as likely to occur when the residents are home as they are in the U.S. Theft of other personal property was 50 per cent higher north of the 49th parallel, than south. The vastly higher murder rate in the U.S. is an important difference. But it certainly does not justify our gun laws, nor discredit theirs. For more than a century, American murder rates have been three to 10 times higher than those of other western nations. And the differences in rates have remained reasonably constant before and after the introduction of strict gun laws in Canada, Britain, Australia, Japan, New Zealand and elsewhere. Indeed, the murder rates in other industrialized nations have inched closer to those in the U.S. despite various attempts to register all guns or license all gun owners, or even ban guns altogether. For some reason, Americans see murder as a solution to their problems, murder with guns, murder with knives, murder with fists, much more often than do the citizens of other western nations. The difference lies in their culture, not just their `gun culture'. Crimes of all sorts, including murder, are lowest in those states with the highest rates of gun ownership. States such as Vermont, New Hampshire, North Dakota and Montana, where gun ownership is at least twice what it is in Canada, have murder rates as low as one-half that in the provinces which are their immediate neighbours. The ICVS points out what Interpol and others have also pointed out, Canadians have no reason to be smug about crime, or about gun laws. ********** Regards, Dennis Baron - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: July 19 column - gun registration Date: 11 Aug 1998 18:20:25 -0600 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Fri, 17 Jul 1998 01:42:49 -0600 Received: from ez0.ezlink.com by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id BAA18502; Fri, 17 Jul 1998 01:32:08 -0600 Received: (from list@localhost) by ez0.ezlink.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA25544; Thu, 16 Jul 1998 21:40:17 -0600 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jul 1998 21:40:17 -0600 X-Sender: vin@dali.lvrj.com Message-Id: Resent-Message-ID: <"NxnU-2.0.YA6.eTihr"@ez0.ezlink.com> Resent-From: vinsends@ezlink.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/519 X-Loop: vinsends@ezlink.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vinsends-request@ezlink.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline FROM MOUNTAIN MEDIA FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE DATED JULY 19, 1998 THE LIBERTARIAN, By Vin Suprynowicz They're 'shocked, shocked,' at the FBI's plans Nearly every day, it seems, my e-mailbox is flooded with emergency dispatches from well-meaning but breathless defenders of the Second Amendment, urging all their friends to write or e-mail the appropriate congresscritter in opposition to whatever new piece of chicanery the gun-grabbers have got up to (three-day waiting periods to buy long guns, $16 background checks before a gunsmith can return your repaired weapon, 1000 percent ammunition taxes, jail sentences for gun owners whose guns = are (start ital)stolen(end ital) and used in teenage crimes, et bleeping endless cetera.) Either that, or I'm supposed to frantically weigh in at the latest on-line media poll asking "Do we need more gun control" ... with the results thrown out and never publicized, of course, should the majority -- as usual -- answer "No." Last week, a pair of faithful correspondents advised: "Senator Smith, R-New Hampshire, is apparently attempting to put the brakes on the FBI shenanigans regarding the Brady Law. One of his = proposals is to defund the ability of the FBI to tax gun owners; another is to = defund any attempt by the FBI to use Brady 'instant check' as a mechanism to keep gun owners' names, and requires 'immediate destruction of all (gun buyer) information in any form whatsoever.' Another is to allow aggrieved = citizens to sue the agency and collect damages and attorneys' fees. He needs to = hear from lots of people that he is supported in his stand. Please take the = time to e-mail or fax a letter to him." I've actually been lobbied on the phone by some gun rights advocates I respect, this week, ensuring me Sen. Smith is the closest thing to a = friend freedom-lovers have in the Senate, and insisting his proposal could indeed strike a solid blow for the Second Amendment, by giving citizens some standing to get into court and challenge the coming national background checks (and resultant national gun registration -- precursor to confiscation in Nazi Germany, in Australia, everywhere it's been tried.) Maybe Sen. Smith means well. I don't know. Regardless, I've had enough of this game. I replied to my well-meaning correspondents: # # # Hi, guys -- Pardon me, but I grow tired of running first one way, then another, on treadmills erected by others. "Requiring immediate destruction of all (gun buyer) information in any form whatsoever" is too ridiculous for even a child to fall for. Let's say these national background checks for ALL gun sales go into effect Dec. 1, as scheduled. But the FBI is absolutely forbidden by law to keep any such records, ironclad, cross our hearts and hope to die. Now, a weapon is found at a crime scene. (Notice the careful phrasing. Most "weapons found at crime scenes" are stolen and thus untraceable. Few were actually used in any crime, since shooters tend to carry their guns away with them, rather than dropping these expensive tools like candy wrappers. If your loser brother-in-law is rousted out of bed at 3 a.m. and the cops find a bag of marijuana in his cereal box, then your grandfather's= First World War souvenir Mauser in the attic becomes a "weapon found at a crime scene.") Using the national gun registration computer data bank which they have illegally established in West Virginia, the FBI traces the owner -- you -- and you admit the weapon was "borrowed" by your loser brother-in-law. You are then arrested along with him, on charges you "allowed a deadly weapon to fall into unauthorized hands ..." What happens? The suspects are set free -- the evidence and all subsequent confessions disallowed under the "exclusionary rule" -- because the G-men violated the "no gun registration data-bank" law, while the = G-men (up to and including Louis Freeh) are indicted, tried, convicted, and locked up in small cells with roommates named Butch. Right? Oh, sure. And if you believe this, I can also sell you an address where you can send care packages at the federal penitentiary in Lewisburg, where Lon Horiuchi and everyone up the 1992 FBI chain of command are now doing their 30-year sentences for the murder of Vicki Weaver. No, I am not going to express any support for a suit who claims he is "shocked, shocked to learn" that the FBI and BATF are proposing to violate our Second Amendment rights ... while snickering behind his hand that any attempt to DISBAND the FBI and BATF, and to REPEAL the Brady Bill (along with the Firearms Acts of 1934 and 1968) would be "extreme, counterproductive, and politically unfeasible." The simpering Tories. Let our GOP senators filibuster any bills that = come before the Senate, until they win a straight up-and-down recorded voice vote on REPEAL OF THE BRADY ACT. Nothing else will draw any "fan letters" from me. We're being played like a wheezing calliope, here. We're being set up to "thank" our masters when they "reluctantly" agree that our gunsmiths won't have to do a $16 background check on us when they return our repaired hunting rifles ... THIS year. And this process has now been going on for = 65 YEARS! My CAT can figure out there's no way to get the little bell out of the cat toy faster than that. Next time: what to do. Vin Suprynowicz is the assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas Review-Journal. Readers may contact him via e-mail at vin@lvrj.com. *** Vin Suprynowicz, vin@lvrj.com "The right of self-defense is the first law of nature; in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and when the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction." -- Henry St. George Tucker, in Blackstone's 1768 "Commentaries on the Laws of England." - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: July 21 column - gun control Date: 11 Aug 1998 18:20:41 -0600 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Fri, 17 Jul 1998 01:52:37 -0600 Received: from ez0.ezlink.com by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id BAA18512; Fri, 17 Jul 1998 01:41:54 -0600 Received: (from list@localhost) by ez0.ezlink.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA25597; Thu, 16 Jul 1998 21:40:46 -0600 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jul 1998 21:40:46 -0600 X-Sender: vin@dali.lvrj.com Message-Id: Resent-Message-ID: <"KtORr.0.HF6.ZUihr"@ez0.ezlink.com> Resent-From: vinsends@ezlink.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/520 X-Loop: vinsends@ezlink.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vinsends-request@ezlink.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline FROM MOUNTAIN MEDIA FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE DATED JULY 21, 1998 THE LIBERTARIAN, By Vin Suprynowicz Like a soccer team with only one player - the goalie Last time, I was detailing the way cynical "pro-gun-rights" Republican congressmen play naive freedom-lovers for fools. The "bad cop" half of the Incumbent Republicrat Party propose 10 new infringements on our Second Amendment rights, and pass three, and our "heroes" get our campaign contributions and our votes for "fighting the good fight" and "turning back the worst seven parts of that darned, terrible gun-grabbers' package" ... which only turn up again next year, in a NEW set of 10 insults to the Bill of Rights, of which only three MORE will subsequently be endorsed by the lying GOP and their gun club affiliate, the NRA, as "the best compromise we're likely to get this year ..." Meantime, folks on our side run themselves ragged until they finally = lie, motionless, stupefied, and resigned, in a fetal position, like the rat who's been shocked the past 10 times he tried to eat the food. I'm already hearing it: "Don't bother fighting the Moynihan 1000 percent ammo tax. I'm told that one's going nowhere." Just go to sleep, little ones. The bogeyman will never REALLY come. They wouldn't dare add THAT as = a rider to some highway bill in the final hours of the session ... Duh. The "pro-gun-rights" Republican party has been in charge of both houses of the United States Congress for three-and-a-half years. In the so-called Contract with America, Newt Gingrich promised a straight up-or-down voice vote on repeal of the Brady Bill. It's the only promise he never even (start ital)tried(end ital) to keep. Why? Because he knows all gun owners will reflexively vote Republican in 1998, regardless. So why endanger the support of any marginal, socialist, pro-big-government, urban voters to please us? We're not "in play." We can safely be ignored. # # # Haven't you ever wondered why the "good guys" never submit a bill which would repeal 10 bad gun control laws, and then "settle for a compromise" = in which the Democrats and Handgun Control endorse three of the 10 as the "least harmful," whereupon the next year the forces of freedom re-integrate= the seven remaining steps toward restored Secopnd Amendment freedom in a NEW list of 10 bad gun laws to be repealed, making the OTHER side scramble around trying to block seven out of 10? With all the money the National Rifle Association has raised, and all = the "B-plus and better" rated "pro-gun congressmen" we've elected, how come we never see Handgun Control on the defensive, running around firing off desperate e-mails to (start ital)their(end ital) members, going "Ohmygosh, 34 different bills have been introduced this session, attempting to close down the BATF and effectively re-legalize the public carry of machine guns without a permit ... even in federal courthouses and airports! Help! Help! They keep slipping in funding for free distribution of surplus machine = guns as riders on farm bills! The DCM is now authorized to sell surplus full-auto M-14s, BARs, and water-cooled 30-caliber Brownings for $100 to anyone who sends in a postcard, with an automatic waiver of the $200 'transfer tax.' And we didn't even know about it; turns out it was buried at page 666 of the Equal Rights for Blind Ambulance Drivers bill. Oh, what ever shall we do?!" How come it never works THAT way? Unless, maybe, there AREN'T any good guys. Duh. Gun owners -- anyone who cherishes the Second Amendment and the Bill of Rights -- have to stop running this treadmill, immediately. Just step off. Stop donating to Republicans or to the NRA (sponsor of both the Brady Bill and the Gun Control Act of 1968). Let them know your vote isn't "a given." When you can, give your money and your votes to radically pro-Bill-of-Rights Libertarians, and to the Milwaukee-based Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (414-769-0760.) Failing that, fund and vote for a DEMOCRAT (at least they're reliably pro-choice on ONE issue), while advising the GOP candidate (and the local newspaper) in writing that you are doing so to punish the Republican party for not repealing the Brady Bill, and the National Firearms Acts of 1968 and 1934, which they have the votes to do, TODAY. Tell them: "I'd rather vote for an honest gun-grabbing socialist, than for a lying Nerf Republican who won't even stay bought." Vin Suprynowicz is the assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas Review-Journal. Readers may contact him via e-mail at vin@lvrj.com. The = web site for the Suprynowicz column is at http://www.nguworld.com/vindex/. The column is syndicated in the United States and Canada via Mountain Media Syndications, P.O. Box 4422, Las Vegas Nev. 89127. *** Vin Suprynowicz, vin@lvrj.com "The right of self-defense is the first law of nature; in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and when the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction." -- Henry St. George Tucker, in Blackstone's 1768 "Commentaries on the Laws of England." - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: Rep. Cook voted for the anti-freedom Shays-Meehan bill Date: 11 Aug 1998 23:45:00 -0700 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Proof from the House of Representative's website that Representative Cook joined 60 Republicans plus Rep. Charles Schumer and Rep. Bernie Sanders to vote in favor of the anti-freedom Shays-Meehan Campaign Finance Reform bill. Scooter! FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 405 H R 2183 RECORDED VOTE 6-AUG-1998 QUESTION: On Passage BILL TITLE: Campaign Finance Reform AYES NOES PRES-NV REPUBLICAN 61 164 2 DEMOCRATIC 190 15 1 INDEPENDENT 1 TOTALS 252 179 3 --- AYES 252 --- Ackerman Gillmor Oberstar Allen Gilman Obey Andrews Gordon Olver Bachus Graham Ortiz Baesler Green Owens Baldacci Greenwood Packard Barcia Gutierrez Pallone Barrett (NE) Hall (OH) Parker Barrett (WI) Hamilton Pascrell Bass Harman Pastor Becerra Hefner Payne Bentsen Hill Pelosi Bereuter Hilliard Petri Berman Hinchey Pickett Berry Hinojosa Pomeroy Bilbray Holden Porter Blagojevich Hooley Poshard Blumenauer Horn Price (NC) Boehlert Houghton Quinn Bonior Hoyer Ramstad Borski Hulshof Rangel Boswell Jackson (IL) Regula Boucher Jackson-Lee(TX) Reyes Boyd Jefferson Riggs Brady (PA) Johnson (CT) Rivers Brown (CA) Johnson (WI) Rodriguez Brown (FL) Johnson, E. B. Roemer Brown (OH) Kanjorski Rothman Campbell Kaptur Roukema Capps Kelly Roybal-Allard Cardin Kennedy (MA) Rush Carson Kennedy (RI) Sabo Castle Kennelly Sanchez Clay Kildee Sanders Clayton Kilpatrick Sandlin Clement Kim Sanford Clyburn Kind (WI) Sawyer Condit Kleczka Saxton Conyers Klink Schumer Cook . . . - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Will Thompson Subject: But....it's against the law, it was against the law..... Date: 12 Aug 1998 14:19:52 -0600 CELEBRATION, Fla., August 12 (UPI S) _ Osceola County, Fla., authorities are searching (Wednesday) for a man responsible for the first violent crime ever reported in Celebration, Disney Co.'s two-year- old planned community west of Walt Disney World. Police say the suspect threatened to shoot a family in their home before making off with an undisclosed amount of cash. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: Colt's CEO likes gun control 1/2 Date: 13 Aug 1998 07:00:00 -0700 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Organization: nomotax CC: PRJ ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- Organization: Cajun Clickers Computer Club TABLE OF CONTENTS: 1. COLT'S CHIEF STANDS UP FOR FEDERAL GUN CONTROL By Henry Goldman, _Philadelphia Inquirer_ staff writer* ====================================================================== ********************************************************************** Declare your own website a BILL OF RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT site today!! The vile reign of state terrorism is drawing to a close at long last. A new day is dawning for _liberty_. You can share in making history. Go to http://www.webleyweb.com/lneil/index.html and click on the scroll. ********************************************************************** COLT'S CHIEF STANDS UP FOR FEDERAL GUN CONTROL By Henry Goldman, _Philadelphia Inquirer_ staff writer* Special to _The Libertarian Enterprise_ WEST HARTFORD, Conn. -- Ronald L. Stewart is unique among the nation's gun manufacturers. He favors a form of national gun control. Stewart, the chief executive officer of Colt's Manufacturing Co., advocates a comprehensive federal firearms law, including the creation of a federal gun permit. And he wants gun owners to be licensed, tested and subjected to mandatory safety training. These views have made him a pariah in the gun community. On gun-friendly web sites, there have been calls for a boycott of Colt's handguns and rifles. "The actions of Colt's officials are detrimental to American-style freedoms and liberties!" wrote one recent contributor to the GunsSaveLives Internet Discussion List. In an interview at the headquarters of the 162-year-old company, Stewart said his views were based on the assumption that increased government regulation was inevitable. "I'm just searching for a middle-of-the-road position, and that's why I've taken such a beating from others in the industry," he said. "They want me to just go along with something that the public increasingly sees as an extreme view." For gun manufacturers and distributors, he said, federal regulation would be far easier to live with than separate laws for each state. And licensing and testing of gun users, he said, is no more onerous, and no less reasonable, than licensing and testing of those who drive automobiles. "I'm trying to address the question of how do you operate the gun safely so that you don't injure somebody," he said. "It doesn't make sense to stake out a position that is perceived by the public to be anti-safety... "I'm not a gun nut," Stewart said. "I'm not even a member of the NRA." More often than not, Stewart said, he supports the National Rifle Association's positions on issues. But the NRA, according to chief executive officer Wayne LaPierre, has "never been in favor of a federal permit and never will be." Some of Stewart's critics say his gun-control proposals are motivated more to promote Colt than to enhance public safety. "I think there are many who feel, rightly or wrongly, he has staked out these positions to curry favor with police departments and with those in the federal government, who would [be able to] influence the success of their product," said Dave Tinker, publisher of _Firearms Business_, a trade publication. Stewart denies such accusations, which were also made by the Coalition of New Jersey Sportsmen in a flyer distributed widely at the NRA convention in Philadelphia last month. But there is no question that Stewart has developed a business strategy intended more for insulating Colt from government regulations than fighting them. In a highly fragmented and competitive market that has been stagnant for five years, he hopes to capture an increased share of the law-enforcement market -- and ultimately the home-user market -- through so-called smart-gun technology while expanding military sales overseas. While Stewart sees himself as eminently reasonable, others in the gun industry depict him as a heretic. "He's definitely espousing views about our industry that are out of step with opinions held by manufacturers and gun owners, and it is a matter of great concern to us," said Georgia Nichols, vice president and general counsel of Connecticut-based O.F. Mossberg & Sons, which makes shotguns and other firearms. In May, Stewart resigned from the board of the American Shooting Sports Council, an Atlanta-based trade group, after the council attacked the Clinton administration's ban on imported assault weapons. What upset Stewart was that the council, in launching its attack, said that one reason to permit such imports was that they are no different from domestic products such as the AR-15, a semiautomatic rifle Colt makes. Stewart's declaration of independence from the rest of the industry came in December when he wrote a guest editorial in _American Firearms Industry_ magazine. While he attacked the antigun lobby, he also endorsed federal regulation. [ Continued In Next Message... ] - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: Trunk Tragedy Reflections Date: 13 Aug 1998 07:00:00 -0700 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Regarding the terrible deaths of five little girls in West Valley, the chief of the West Valley Police department says, don't blame families for trunk tragedy. This case is not about blame or fault. Nordfelt asked people not to judge the parents of the girls, stressing that the community needs to help the families heal. No shit Sherlock, but what if the tragedy had been from a handgun stored in one of the families' home or what if it was a family of immigrants living on welfare in a poorly kept house or a situation where family members were known crack smokers or just out back having a cigarette on the porch? Would it still remain a case removed from blame and fault or would the police be seeking some kind of charges against the parent Dixie Smith for child abuse and/or child neglect? Yes, life is a dangerous place to be and even more so when parents and caregivers fail to keep a vigilante eye out for those in their charge. In many ways this is typical in and of large LDS families where children are allowed to run wild ... up and down the streets in their diapers, drinking out of gutters, causing problems, etc. This tragedy and similar incidents can be prevented by parents paying closer attention to their children and those in their care. Whether one's reading the Bible in a living room or out back having a smoke, neglect still equals neglect which sometimes equals death and tragedy for young and old alike. At any rate, do I believe the parent Dixie Smith should be punished? I believe she already has been, by her own failure to supervise the little ones in her care properly and by the personal pain and guilt she's likely to carry to her own grave. Should Dixie Smith be punished by the government? No, I think not. Her suffering is great enough already -- as any person in her position would be. Certainly, anyone who has ever taken charge of little kids know how demanding it can be to keep a constant watch on them, as it only takes one minute (if even that) for the little ones to scamper off and into harm's way. Yes, this was a tragic accident and even more tragic by calls for big government to mandate trunk release switches to prevent this kind of rare occurrence from happening again. Yes, create a public crisis and impose some more government regulations on big business because some people are negligent in their duties and actions. Still, I wonder how the little girls were able to get into the trunk and close it without anybody helping them, showing them, seeing them or hearing them? This is the one part missing from this sad and sorry story that I'd like to know more about. Don W. Johnstun - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: Colt's CEO likes gun control 2/2 Date: 14 Aug 1998 06:38:00 -0700 Strangely enough, his alienation from the rest of the industry had its first public manifestation two months earlier, when he appeared to be taking an anti-safety stance. There was a ceremony at the White House at which 10 gun executives told President Clinton they would voluntarily ship child-safe locks with their products. Since then, 16 more gun-makers have signed on. But Stewart was not at the White House and has not signed on. "Why is it that everyone else feels that it's a good idea and he doesn't?" asked Richard Feldman, director of the American Shooting Sports Council, which organized the event. "We've given people what they need to help prevent someone, particularly a child, from negligently using the gun." Stewart, who called the White House announcement "a dog-and-pony show," said such locks are unreliable and give a false sense of security when used on a loaded gun. He said he expects lawsuits when locked guns accidentally fire. The real way to prevent accidents, Stewart said, is the "smart gun," designed to prevent a gun from being fired by anyone but the intended operator. Stewart claims his company is ahead in developing such a gun, using a microchip worn on the shooter that will transmit a signal to a receiving chip inside the gun. One prototype has been tested with mixed results; a second will be available by the end of August, Stewart said. If all goes well, the company will be ready to make the guns available to police departments for testing within two years, he said. Colt sees a big market in law enforcement; 16 percent of all shootings of police officers occur when their guns are grabbed out of their hands or holsters by criminals. Currently, Colt has almost no share of the police market. "It's a technology that you can't ignore, and it has the potential not just to save a lot of police lives, but to safeguard weapons purchased for home use, keep them out of the hands of thieves or kids, people who shouldn't have them," said Paul Bolton, who heads the International Association of Chiefs of Police. Gun sales to police departments, usually at cost, do not create profits, but the prestige of being chosen as a law-enforcement weapon creates profitable sales in the commercial market, Stewart said. Why are others in the industry so distrustful of Stewart and so quick to question his motives? One reason is that Stewart, 56, is an outsider, according to Tinker, the publisher of _Firearms Business_. Stewart became Colt's president in 1996, after 22 years at Chrysler and a working lifetime in the automobile industry. He was brought in after the company had been in bankruptcy and had been purchased by a limited partnership headed by Donald Zilkha, a New York financier. Since then, Stewart said, a series of management reforms and cost controls have produced a profit of about $10 million on about $100 million in sales. The key to sustained profitability, Stewart said, "will be whether we can insulate ourselves from the turmoil that will exist in the commercial gun market in the years to come." He said the fact that he's an outsider had helped him see gun-control issues more clearly than his competitors do. "I'm not dealing with the emotions of it," he said. "I can sit back and see where it's going. The gun industry is where the automobile industry was in the 1960s -- the same clamor for safety regulations. Seat belts. Air bags. We are going to go through a period of reform and legislation. All I'm trying to do is survive and prosper in whatever direction this thing takes." ====================================================================== * This article appeared in the _Philadelphia Inquirer on July 13, 1998 and was forwarded to _TLE_ from the GunsSaveLives Internet Discussion List by Bob Phipps . Hungry dingoes near the central Queensland [Australia] coast are stalking neigborhoods in their hunt for food. Rockhampton Deputy Mayor Jom Rundel said the wild dogs from the Mount Archer National Park on the city's eastern boundary were causing alarm in nearby suburbs. The packs of dingoes are wandering through neighborhoods in search of food, but the people living there are powerless to do anything. "You can't bait within two kilometers of a residence ... you can't shoot in a residential area," Rundel told the country's ABC radio. "Plus with the gun laws, no one has a gun anyway." ====================================================================== This item first appeared in the "Earthweek" section of the _Portland Oregonian_ science page, 15 July 1998. It was sent to us by attorney and raconteur Tom Creasing, who reminds us, "All animals are created equal -- some just take longer to cook." === _ RM 1.31 3226 _ Windows Error 010 - Reserved for future mistakes Patrick "In its larger and juster meaning, property embraces everything to which a man may attach a value and have a right; and which leaves to everyone else a like advantage..." - James Madison - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: Fratrum: Fw: [FP] Your turn to play Big Brother (fwd) Date: 14 Aug 1998 11:43:59 -0600 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Fri, 14 Aug 1998 11:32:15 -0600 Received: from fs1.mainstream.net by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id LAA12305; Fri, 14 Aug 1998 11:20:53 -0600 Received: (from smap@localhost) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id NAA26685; Fri, 14 Aug 1998 13:29:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1) by fs1.mainstream.net via smap (V1.3) id sma026532; Fri Aug 14 13:26:47 1998 Message-Id: <9808141753.0smx@xpresso.seaslug.org> Errors-To: listproc@mainstream.com Reply-To: noban@xpresso.seaslug.org Originator: noban@mainstream.net Sender: noban@Mainstream.net Precedence: bulk X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Aug 14, Terry Walker wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows -------------------= -] -----Original Message----- >Tuesday, August 11, 1998 > >INTERSCOPE > >Lisa Ronthal's >Exclusive commentary > >Your turn to play Big Brother >Audit your representatives through the Web > >[The complete article is at WorldNetDaily:] >http://www.worldnetdaily.com/ronthal/980811.comlr.html > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------= - - >---- > >Audit your representatives' finances online > >They do it to you -- now you can do it to them. Thanks to the nonprofit >Center for Responsive Politics, you have quick, easy Web access, right = now, >to detailed information about your elected representatives' finances. = Here >are just a few of the things you can find out via the CRP site: Examine = any >member of Congress' personal financial disclosure forms >(http://www.crp.org/pfds/) Look up representatives' campaign money = profiles >(http://www.crp.org/candidates/index.htm) Find individual contributors to >federal candidates, PACs, or party committees -- the site lets you look them >up by name, ZIP code, employer, or candidate >(http://www.crp.org/indivs/public/htdocs/) Profile the money breakdown of >any 1998 House or Senate race (http://www.crp.org/1998elect/index.htm) = The >CRP maintains databases on everything from White House coffees to >Congressional travel to tobacco money -- and it's all online. > >All this information is technically available through other channels; the >difference is that now it's practically and simply available, for the >taking, to anyone with access to an Internet connection. And that is the >information revolution in a nutshell. This Web site isn't just an = important >political resource in itself: it's also a superb example of the >still-too-infrequently-realized potential of the Internet for altering = the >balance of power in favor of the individual. > >If you thought the government's tendency to try to place controls on >Internet use was really all about child pornography, think again. It's >certainly not about controlling child porn; I would imagine that it's not = a >question of controlling cultural-political content at all -- I've no = doubt >the state is perfectly happy to be able to monitor its opponents of all >sorts through their activity online. No. It's all about the flow of >information itself. > >[snop] > >The balance of the article is at: >http://www.worldnetdaily.com/ronthal/980811.comlr.html [------------------------- end of forwarded message -----------------------= -] -- - ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------= - An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand =3D Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy = a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus = Christ ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------= - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: Beware the USSC Date: 14 Aug 1998 21:49:00 -0700 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Cc: discussion@derail.org The Libertarians are going to have a booth at the Golden Spoke gun show. Kitty Burton is coordinating. Her number is 1-800-777-3834-access code 21. Are you aware that the Utah Shooting Sports Council (chaired by Rob Bishop) and the NRA both supported the measure to increase the requirements for petitions? Their reason? In Washington State, some anti-gun people got an anti-gun measure on the ballot by petition. (It was soundly defeated.) They seem to overlook the fact that when you restrict someone else's rights, you restrict your own. (It's doubtful we could have had the individual right to bear arms amendment on the ballot if we had the tougher standards.) Beware the USSC. Rob Bishop has replaced the dynamic Scott Engen, and it appears that Rob's job is to act as a neutralizer. Under Scott, the USSC was very effective in turning aside criminal protection legislation (gun control laws). Now the USSC appears to be dead in the water (their web site is two years out of date, and I get no response to membership inquiries). Dick Partridge, Libertarian Candidate Utah State Senate District 24 On Thu, 13 Aug 1998 19:21:13 -0600 Bill Barton writes: Derailers: If you are tired of fighting legislators who vote the way of the education and public employee lobby you will want to help get signatures on the initiative petition that would put a stop to withholding money from their paychecks that go to their Political Action Funds to give to candidates who will vote with them. Next week we are planning to visit the S L County Fair (in MUrray) on Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday evenings. If you can even come over for an hour it would help a great deal. This initiative is key to combating the problems we have been plagued with for years in electing and reelecting people who will represent good government. Many get elected but then get defeated by education and public employee supported candidates because of the money and organization. Again, we are asking you help. Please E-mail to me or call 968-6964 if you can help. Bill Barton =========================================================== William T. Barton http://www.xmission.com/~bbarton/ bbarton@mail.xmission.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Joseph Waldron Subject: Re: Beware the USSC Date: 15 Aug 1998 06:00:30 -0700 SCOTT BERGESON wrote: > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 21:34:13 -0700 > From: "Richard L. Partridge" > To: bbarton@mail.xmission.com > Cc: discussion@derail.org > Subject: Re: PAC petitions > > The Libertarians are going to have a booth at the Golden Spoke gun show. > Kitty Burton is coordinating. Her number is 1-800-777-3834-access code 21. > > Are you aware that the Utah Shooting Sports Council (chaired by Rob Bishop) > and the NRA both supported the measure to increase the requirements for > petitions? Their reason? In Washington State, some anti-gun people got > an anti-gun measure on the ballot by petition. (It was soundly defeated.) > They seem to overlook the fact that when you restrict someone else's > rights, you restrict your own. (It's doubtful we could have had the > individual right to bear arms amendment on the ballot if we had the > tougher standards.) I don't know what number of signatures are required in Utah. In Washington, it is 7% of the people who voted in the last gubernatorial election, which means--with a state population of 5.4 million and about 3 million registered voters--you need 180,000 or so valid signatures. Figure a 12-15% invalid rate, and to be comfortable, you need to turn in 220,000-225,000 petition signatures. In almost every case in recent history, the only way to make that number is by paid signature gathering. Doesn't matter what the issue is--if you want to get on the ballot, figure on paying to get signatures. "Three strike you're out" bought about half, as did "Hard time for armed crime"--AND I-676, the gun control initiative. Interestingly, no one with the NRA here in Washington has complained about the number/percentage of signatures required to place a measure on the ballot. We have two directors resident in the state, one field services rep, and a lobbyist working out of ILA-Sacramento (the same one that covers Utah). I speak with each of them on a weekly basis, if not more frequently. I don't know what's driving the issue there in Utah. Just thought I'd offer some background. Joe Waldron Chairman, WeCARE (the "No on 676" campaign) - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: Metaksa on the way out? Date: 17 Aug 1998 08:17:46 -0600 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Sat, 15 Aug 1998 01:05:09 -0600 Received: from lists1.best.com by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id AAA12875; Sat, 15 Aug 1998 00:53:56 -0600 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.9.0/8.9.0/best.ls) id XAA23733; Fri, 14 Aug 1998 23:21:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199808150621.XAA23733@lists1.best.com> BestServHost: lists.best.com Sender: fco-errors@lists.best.com Errors-To: fco-errors@lists.best.com Reply-To: chris@nealknox.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline I have a lot going on right at the moment and hope to get an FCO out this weekend, however I wanted to alert you to a developing story and point you to the Firearms Coalition home page (http://www.nealknox.com). Follow the "NRA Controversy" link from the main page to read what's going on behind the rumors and anonymous reports. Chris - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: Executive Orders Date: 17 Aug 1998 08:26:14 -0600 Received: from mail.interjetnet.net ([208.231.136.27]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Fri, 14 Aug 1998 22:09:01 -0600 Received: from default (ppp075.interjetnet.net [208.236.167.75]) by mail.interjetnet.net (2.5 Build 2640 (Berkeley 8.8.6)/8.8.4) with SMTP id WAA00507; Fri, 14 Aug 1998 22:01:54 -0600 Message-ID: <005801bdc802$83f80040$62a7ecd0@default> X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=_0155E1B9.147519DC" --=_0155E1B9.147519DC Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline I'm sorry for the redundancy of this message for some of you , but this is = very important Print Copies for your friends. =20 The misuse of Executive Orders is the greatest threat to Constitutional = Government . H.CON.RES.236 During most of this century, Executive Orders from the President have been the chief means of by-passing the legislative process of Congressional approval. These Orders have been a blatant attempt to = circumvent the Separation of Powers, which protect our Freedoms. If we allow the President to continue to legislate through Executive Orders, Congress then becomes a rubber stamp' for an out of control Chief Executive. Article I, Section 1 of the Constitution states: "All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of=20 the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives." The people of the United States granted certain powers = to the Federal Government. One of these is the lawmaking power which resides = only in=20 Congress, not with the President. This lawmaking power has been usurped by the Presidency through Executive Orders for over 60 years. Jack Metcalf from Washington has sponsored H.Con.RES.236 which addresses the problem of Presidential legislation, (copy enclosed). When = this passes, most of the Executive Orders in recent years will be changed = from=20 being law to being advisory only, meaning they have no function as law.=20 This will resolve EO#13083 which would have put most State functions under Federal control. This Executive Order, EO#13083, created such a public furor that the President postponed implementation, but did not = rescind the order. EO#12919 combines a number of President John Kennedy's Executive Orders into one. Under a =3Dnational emergency', EO#12919 puts all power = into =3D the presidency and in effect does away with the Constitution, the Bill =3D of Rights, and the Separation of Powers. Metcalf's bill will handle this travesty as well. Write, e-mail, or phone your member of Congress and your Senators. Ask them to co-sponsor this bill, support it, and vote for it. = It will go=20 a long way to restoring the Separation of Powers. If you need the e-mail address of your Congressman, e-mail us for it. Please send this to = as=20 many people as you can! If this was forwarded to you and you wish to=20 get future posts directly, e-mail your address to bookstore@itsnet.com. H.CON.RES.236 SPONSOR: Rep Metcalf (introduced 03/05/98) TITLE(S): OFFICIAL TITLE AS INTRODUCED: A concurrent resolution to express the sense of the Congress that any Executive order that infringes on the powers and duties of the Congress under article I, section 8 of the Constitution, or that would require the expenditure of Federal funds not specifically appropriated for the = purpose=20 of the Executive order, is advisory only unless enacted as law. STATUS: Detailed Legislative Status House Actions Mar 5, 98: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. COMMITTEE(S): COMMITTEE(S) OF REFERRAL: House Judiciary 11 COSPONSORS: Rep Hyde - 03/05/98 Rep Bunning - 03/05/98 Rep Lucas - 03/05/98 Rep Neumann - 03/05/98 Rep Hilleary - 03/05/98 Rep Smith, N. - 03/05/98 Rep Herger - 03/05/98 Rep Gilman - 03/05/98 Rep Traficant - 03/05/98 Rep Chabot - 03/05/98 Rep Scarborough - 07/15/98 SUMMARY: (AS INTRODUCED) Provides that any executive order issued by the President that infringes on the powers and duties of the Congress under the Constitution, or that would require the expenditure of Federal funds not specifically appropriated for the purpose of the executive order, shall be advisory = only unless enacted as law. --=_0155E1B9.147519DC Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Part.001"
I'm sorry for the redundancy of this message for some of you , but this is very important Print  Copies for your friends. 
The misuse of Executive Orders is the greatest threat to Constitutional Government .
 
H.CON.RES.236


During most of this century, Executive Orders from the President
have been the chief means of by-passing the legislative process of
Congressional approval.  These Orders have been a blatant attempt to circumvent the
Separation of Powers, which protect our Freedoms.  If we allow the
President to continue to legislate through Executive Orders, Congress then
becomes a  rubber stamp' for an out of control Chief Executive.

  Article I, Section 1 of the Constitution states:

"All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of
the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of
Representatives." The people of the United States granted certain powers to the
Federal Government.  One of these is the lawmaking power which resides only in
Congress, not with the President.  This lawmaking power has been usurped
by the Presidency through Executive Orders for over 60 years.


Jack Metcalf from Washington has sponsored H.Con.RES.236 which
addresses the problem of Presidential legislation, (copy enclosed).  When this
passes, most of the Executive Orders in recent years will be changed from
being law to being advisory only, meaning they have no function as law.
This will resolve EO#13083 which would have put most State functions
under Federal control.  This Executive Order, EO#13083, created such a
public furor that the President postponed implementation, but did not rescind
the order.

EO#12919 combines a number of President John Kennedy's Executive
Orders into one.  Under a =national  emergency', EO#12919 puts all power into =
the presidency and in effect does away with the Constitution, the Bill =
of Rights, and the Separation of Powers.  Metcalf's bill will handle
this travesty as well.

Write, e-mail, or phone your member of Congress and your
Senators.  Ask them to co-sponsor this bill, support it, and vote for it.  It will go
a long way to restoring the Separation of Powers.  If you need the
e-mail address of your Congressman, e-mail us for it.  Please send this to as
many people as you can!   If this was forwarded to you and you wish to
get future posts directly, e-mail your address to bookstore@itsnet.com.

H.CON.RES.236
SPONSOR: Rep Metcalf (introduced 03/05/98)
TITLE(S):

OFFICIAL TITLE AS INTRODUCED:
A concurrent resolution to express the sense of the Congress that any
Executive order that infringes on the powers and duties of the Congress
under article I, section 8 of the Constitution, or that would require the
expenditure of Federal funds not specifically appropriated for the purpose
of the Executive order, is advisory only unless enacted as law.
STATUS: Detailed Legislative Status
House Actions
Mar 5, 98:
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
COMMITTEE(S):
COMMITTEE(S) OF REFERRAL:
House Judiciary
11 COSPONSORS:
Rep Hyde - 03/05/98 Rep Bunning - 03/05/98
Rep Lucas - 03/05/98 Rep Neumann - 03/05/98
Rep Hilleary - 03/05/98 Rep Smith, N. - 03/05/98
Rep Herger - 03/05/98 Rep Gilman - 03/05/98
Rep Traficant - 03/05/98 Rep Chabot - 03/05/98
Rep Scarborough - 07/15/98
SUMMARY:
(AS INTRODUCED)
Provides that any executive order issued by the President that infringes
on the powers and duties of the Congress under the Constitution, or that
would require the expenditure of Federal funds not specifically
appropriated for the purpose of the executive order, shall be advisory only
unless enacted as law.



--=_0155E1B9.147519DC-- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: The reason for the Second Amendment 1/2 Date: 17 Aug 1998 08:17:00 -0700 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- The reason for the Second Amendment by Alan Keyes Sen. Bob Smith has succeeded in amending an upcoming appropriations bill to beat back the latest wave of Clinton administration disrespect for two key elements of a free citizenry -- privacy and the right to keep and bear arms. Smith's amendment to the Justice-State-Commerce appropriations bill would foil FBI plans to keep records of private identifying information on law-abiding citizens who buy guns. The amendment also forbids a proposed tax on gun purchases, and authorizes citizens to sue if the FBI doesn't observe these restrictions. Senator Smith is to be praised for keeping his eye on some balls that might have been lost in the smoke of scandal and misinformation that the Clinton Administration seems endlessly to emit. Actually, few things could make the need for vigorous defense of 2nd Amendment rights clearer than the ongoing spectacle of Clinton contempt for the citizens he is supposed to serve. For the 2nd Amendment is really in the Constitution to give men like Bill Clinton something to think about when their ambition gets particularly over-inflated. The Second Amendment was not put into the Constitution by the Founders merely to allow us to intimidate burglars, or hunt rabbits to our hearts' content. This is not to say that hunting game for the family dinner, or defending against personal dangers, were not anticipated uses for firearms, particularly on the frontier. But these things are not the real purpose of the Amendment. The Founders added the 2nd Amendment so that when, after a long train of abuses, a government evinces a methodical design upon our natural rights, we will have the means to protect and recover our rights. That is why the right to keep and bear arms was included in the Bill of Rights. In fact, if we make the judgment that our rights are being systematically violated, we have not merely the right, but the duty, to resist and overthrow the power responsible. That duty requires that we always maintain the material capacity to resist tyranny, if necessary, something that it is very hard to do if the government has all the weapons. A strong case can be made, therefore, that it is a fundamental DUTY of the free citizen to keep and bear arms. In our time there have been many folks who don't like to be reminded of all this. And they try, in their painful way, to pretend that the word "people" in the 2nd Amendment means something there that it doesn't mean in any one of the other nine amendments in the Bill of Rights. They say that, for some odd reason, the Founders had a lapse, and instead of putting in "states" they put in "people." And so it refers to a right inherent in the state government. This position is incoherent, and has been disproved by every piece of legitimate historical evidence. At one point in Jefferson's letters, for example, he is talking about the militia, and he writes, "militia -- every able-bodied man in the state. ..." The militia was every able-bodied man in the state. It had nothing to do with the state government. The words "well-regulated" had to do with organizing that militia and drilling it in the style of the 19th century, but "militia" itself referred to the able-bodied citizens of the state or commonwealth -- not to the state government. It would make no sense whatsoever to restrict the right to keep and bear arms to state governments, since the principle on which our polity is based, as stated in the Declaration, recognizes that any government, at any level, can become oppressive of our rights. And we must be prepared to defend ourselves against its abuses. But the movement against 2nd Amendment rights is not just a threat to our capacity to defend ourselves physically against tyranny. It is also part of the much more general assault on the very notion that human beings are capable of moral responsibility. This is a second and deeper reason that the defense of the 2nd Amendment is essential to the defense of liberty. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: The reason for the Second Amendment 2/2 Date: 17 Aug 1998 08:17:00 -0700 Advocates of banning guns think we can substitute material things for human self-control, but this approach won't wash. It is the human moral will that saves us from violence, not the presence or absence of weapons. We should reject utterly the absurd theory that weapons are the cause of violence. Consider, for example, the phony assertion that certain weapons should be banned because "they have no purpose except to kill people." It is people that kill people, and they can use countless kinds of weapons to do so, if killing is in their hearts where love of justice should be. This week a 7-year old boy in Chicago apparently used a pair of underwear to commit murder, because he wanted a bike. So let's get down to the real issue: are we moral adults, or are we moral children? If we are adults, then we have the capacity to control our will even in the face of passion, and to be responsible for the exercise of our natural rights. If we are only children, then all the particularly dangerous toys must be controlled by the government. But this "solution" implies that we can trust government with a monopoly on guns, even though we cannot trust ourselves with them. This is not a "solution" I trust. Anyone who is serious about controlling violence must recognize that it can only be done by rooting violence out of the human heart. That's why I don't understand those who say "save us from guns," even while they cling to the coldly violent doctrine that human life has no worth except what they "choose" to assign to it. If we want to end violence in our land, we must warm the hearts of all Americans with a renewed dedication to the God-given equality of all human beings. We must recapture the noble view of man as capable of moral responsibility and self-restraint -- of assuming responsibility for governing himself. This is the real meaning of the 2nd Amendment, and indeed of the entire American project of ordered liberty. It is the business of every citizen to preserve justice in his heart, and the material capacity, including arms, to resist tyranny. These things constitute our character as a free people, which it is our duty to maintain. And to fulfill our duty to be such a people we shall have to return to the humble subjection to the authority of true moral principle that characterized our Founders, and that characterized every generation of Americans, until now. We must regain control of ourselves. Most deeply, then, the assertion of 2nd Amendment rights is the assertion that we intend to control ourselves, and submit to the moral order that God has decreed must govern our lives. And just as we have no right to shirk our duty to submit to that moral order, so we have no right to shirk our duty to preserve unto ourselves the material means to discipline our government, if necessary, so that it remains a fit instrument for the self-government of a free people. The preservation of 2nd Amendment rights, for the right reasons, is a moral and public duty of every citizen. The Clinton Administration's flirtations with executive tyranny should remind us that we have a duty to remain capable of disciplining our government if necessary. Bill Clinton's comprehensive avoidance of personal responsibility for his own actions, and our revulsion at the kind of character which that avoidance has produced in him, should be a kind of horrific preview of the kind of people we will all become if we continue to let our government treat us as though we were incapable of moral self-control. And Senator Smith's successful effort to defeat several policies that treat us that way is precisely the kind of principled defense of our liberty -- and of the premises of our liberty -- that make him so worthy to be a representative of a free people. Alan Keyes Web Site is http://www.AlanKeyes.com -- *************************************************** E Pluribus Unum The Central Ohio Patriot Group P.O. Box 791 Eventline/Voicemail: (614) 823-8499 Grove City, OH 43123 Meetings: Monday Evenings, 7:30pm, Ryan's Steakhouse 3635 W. Dublin-Granville Rd. (just East of Sawmill Rd.) http://www.infinet.com/~eplurib eplurib@infinet.com *************************************************** - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: CNN Impeachment Poll Date: 17 Aug 1998 17:02:48 -0600 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Mon, 17 Aug 1998 16:58:58 -0600 Received: from listbox.com by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id QAA14833; Mon, 17 Aug 1998 16:47:40 -0600 Received: (qmail 21867 invoked by uid 516); 17 Aug 1998 22:57:40 -0000 Delivered-To: rkba-co@majordomo.pobox.com Received: (qmail 21426 invoked from network); 17 Aug 1998 22:57:01 -0000 Received: from ns2.rockymtn.net (HELO mail2.rockymtn.net) (166.93.8.2) by majordomo.pobox.com with SMTP; 17 Aug 1998 22:57:00 -0000 Received: from helmetfish (166-93-57-135.rmi.net [166.93.57.135]) by mail2.rockymtn.net (8.8.8/8.8.7) with SMTP id QAA05877; Mon, 17 Aug 1998 16:49:50 -0600 (MDT) Message-ID: <35D8B359.7F56@rmi.net> Organization: Global Neighbourhood Watch, (http://www.rmi.net/~hlmtfish) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04 (Win95; U) Sender: owner-rkba-co.new@majordomo.pobox.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rkba-co@majordomo.pobox.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Posted to rkba-co by "Charles 'Chuck' Inston" ----------------------- There is an impeachment poll at CNN's web site: http://www.cnn.com/ Question: If Ken Starr reports to Congress that evidence shows President Clinton encouraged Monica Lewinsky to lie, should impeachment hearings be opened?=20 --=20 Charles 'Chuck' Inston "American patriotism is unique in history; it consists of devotion to=20 the rule of law, rather than personal allegiance to a ruler, institutional=20 loyalty to a ruling party, or blind support of a government. America's=20 Founding Fathers understood that a free society would require that=20 government be bound by "the chains of the Constitution"; Americans were to=20 be ruled by law and not by the transitory whims of men." -Uncertain For Help with Majordomo Commands, please send a message to: Majordomo@majordomo.pobox.com with the word Help in the body of the message - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: HCI Alarm bells going off - National Reciprocity CCW Bill Date: 18 Aug 1998 08:14:58 -0600 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Tue, 18 Aug 1998 04:00:17 -0600 Received: from fs1.mainstream.net by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id DAA15262; Tue, 18 Aug 1998 03:48:57 -0600 Received: (from smap@localhost) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id FAA26537; Tue, 18 Aug 1998 05:52:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1) by fs1.mainstream.net via smap (V1.3) id sma026304; Tue Aug 18 05:49:32 1998 Message-Id: <35D936BD.1303@tidalwave.net> Errors-To: listproc@mainstream.com Reply-To: globallaw@tidalwave.net Originator: noban@mainstream.net Sender: noban@Mainstream.net Precedence: bulk X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline "Have Gun, Will Travel" Hey, I kinda' like the sound of that. Giddyup. Rick V. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:=20 August 14, 1998 CONCEALED DANGER: Evaluating the Potential Impact of the "Have Gun, Will Travel" Amendment. =20 Nearly 3,000,000 people will be able to carry concealed handguns across state lines and into most states if Congress passes the "Have Gun, Will Travel" Amendment to H.R. 218, according to data released today by Handgun Control, Inc. (HCI). The amendment, introduced by Rep. Bill McCollum (R-FL), was approved by the House Judiciary Committee on August 5, 1998; the full House of Representatives is expected to vote on the entire bill when Congress reconvenes in September. The passage of this Amendment is particularly ironic, coming as it does only a few weeks after an Illinois resident -- who had been involuntarily committed to a mental institution in Montana -- allegedly brought his gun halfway across the country, ultimately to murder two Capitol Hill police officers. Despite Congress=C6 demands for more expensive security installations to protect their own lives and safety, the members of the Judiciary Committee found it expedient to make interstate gun carrying even easier for thousands of potential security risks. [You hear that guys and gals? - You CITIZENS are 'security risks!'] In an effort to evaluate the potential impact of the "Have Gun, Will Travel" Amendment, Handgun Control, Inc. collected data about the number of licenses to carry concealed weapons that have been issued in 40 states. (These are the states that allow the carrying of concealed weapons and for which statistical data was reasonably accessible. Because statewide data was not available for Georgia, New Hampshire and Vermont, which all allow the carrying of concealed weapons, it can be assumed that the actual number of license holders nationwide is larger than this report estimates.) HCI researchers found that an estimated total of 2,903,502 licenses to carry concealed handguns have been issued in the 40 states for which data was available. =20 With few exceptions, it is currently illegal for licensees to carry concealed handguns out of the state that issued the license. If this amendment becomes law, however, it would allow all licensees to carry concealed handguns in at least 29 other states across the country. The legislation would mandate unrestricted reciprocity between 28 states that allow anyone who does not fall into a prohibited category (such as a convicted felon) to get a license to carry a concealed handgun1. Reciprocity would also apply to Vermont, where it is not necessary to obtain a license to carry a concealed gun.=20 The "Have Gun, Will Travel" Amendment could also supersede state laws in 14 states that have strict standards and police discretion in issuing concealed-carry licenses to residents2. These states give local law enforcement discretion in issuing licenses and usually require applicants to demonstrate a specific need to carry a concealed handgun.=20 This amendment would allow the Governors of each of these 14 states to sign a waiver to allow out-of-state licensees to carry a concealed gun in the state, even if the standards for granting licenses are weaker in the licensees=C6 home state than in the states with much stricter standards. The "Have Gun, Will Travel" Amendment could potentially impact all states except the seven that prohibit the carrying of concealed handguns.3 http://www.handguncontrol.org/press/august14-98.htm - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: chardy@ES.COM (Charles Hardy) Subject: Current Federal Legislation? Date: 18 Aug 1998 14:09:28 -0600 Is anyone aware of any current federal legislation, by bill name, number, or sponsor, to repeal brady, or to require States to honor out of State concealed weapons permits? Thanks. -- Charles C. Hardy | If my employer has an opinion on | these things I'm fairly certain 801.588.7200 (work) | I'm not the one he'd have express it. "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. When you give up that force, you are ruined." -- Patrick Henry, speaking to the Virginia convention for the ratification of the constitution on the necessity of the right to keep and bear arms. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Joe Waldron Subject: Re: Current Federal Legislation? Date: 18 Aug 1998 14:30:08 -0700 Charles Hardy wrote: > > Is anyone aware of any current federal legislation, by bill name, > number, or sponsor, to repeal brady, or to require States to honor out > of State concealed weapons permits? H.R. 218 would allow both active and retired peace officers to carry nationwide. It would also require "right to carry" states to recognize licenses from all other R-T-C states. It passed out of the House Judiciary Committee late last month and is awaiting floor action. H.R. 339 would have mandated recognition of all CCWs by all states and established minumum carry restrictions for those states who do not currently have CCW statutes. It also has the police carry provisions. It is (probably) dead in the House Judiciary Committee. H.R. 2722 is similar to the "civilian" portion of H.R. 339. Dead in committee? S. 816 is a Senate counterpart to H.R. 339. Dead in committee? S. 2175 would "safegiard the privacy" of certain identification records and name checks for ther purchase of a firearm. Dead in committee? There are a couple of bills that would repeal all or part of Brady. I don't have the numbers in front of me. At this point, with less than 30 "work days" left in the 105th Congress, very few bills will come out of committee, much less pass both chambers. Our best bet is to have pro-gun legislation attached as "riders" to fast moving bills such as appropriations bills. A good example of this is the amended version of S. 2260, the Commerce, State, Justive et al Appropriation Act. Before this bill passed the Senate last month, it was amended (the "Smith Amendment") to include language that would prohibit the FBI from charging a feww for Brady instant checks, would require the FBI to "immediately destroy" any identification data on approved instant checks, and would allow a citizen whose rights were violated in this regard to sue in the nearest federal district court. The House passed a similar Commerce-State-Justice appropriation, but without the amended language. We have to ensure that the amendment stays IN the final version of the bill. Joe Waldron - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Joe Waldron Subject: Re: Current Federal Legislation? Date: 18 Aug 1998 14:30:08 -0700 Charles Hardy wrote: > > Is anyone aware of any current federal legislation, by bill name, > number, or sponsor, to repeal brady, or to require States to honor out > of State concealed weapons permits? H.R. 218 would allow both active and retired peace officers to carry nationwide. It would also require "right to carry" states to recognize licenses from all other R-T-C states. It passed out of the House Judiciary Committee late last month and is awaiting floor action. H.R. 339 would have mandated recognition of all CCWs by all states and established minumum carry restrictions for those states who do not currently have CCW statutes. It also has the police carry provisions. It is (probably) dead in the House Judiciary Committee. H.R. 2722 is similar to the "civilian" portion of H.R. 339. Dead in committee? S. 816 is a Senate counterpart to H.R. 339. Dead in committee? S. 2175 would "safegiard the privacy" of certain identification records and name checks for ther purchase of a firearm. Dead in committee? There are a couple of bills that would repeal all or part of Brady. I don't have the numbers in front of me. At this point, with less than 30 "work days" left in the 105th Congress, very few bills will come out of committee, much less pass both chambers. Our best bet is to have pro-gun legislation attached as "riders" to fast moving bills such as appropriations bills. A good example of this is the amended version of S. 2260, the Commerce, State, Justive et al Appropriation Act. Before this bill passed the Senate last month, it was amended (the "Smith Amendment") to include language that would prohibit the FBI from charging a feww for Brady instant checks, would require the FBI to "immediately destroy" any identification data on approved instant checks, and would allow a citizen whose rights were violated in this regard to sue in the nearest federal district court. The House passed a similar Commerce-State-Justice appropriation, but without the amended language. We have to ensure that the amendment stays IN the final version of the bill. Joe Waldron - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: chardy@ES.COM (Charles Hardy) Subject: Re: Current Federal Legislation? Date: 18 Aug 1998 15:29:03 -0600 Thank you Joe. On Tue, 18 Aug 1998, Joe Waldron posted: >Charles Hardy wrote: >> >> Is anyone aware of any current federal legislation, by bill name, >> number, or sponsor, to repeal brady, or to require States to honor out >> of State concealed weapons permits? > >H.R. 218 would allow both active and retired peace officers to carry >nationwide. It would also require "right to carry" states to recognize >licenses from all other R-T-C states. It passed out of the House >Judiciary Committee late last month and is awaiting floor action. > -- Charles C. Hardy | If my employer has an opinion on | these things I'm fairly certain 801.588.7200 (work) | I'm not the one he'd have express it. "To avoid domestic tyranny, the people must be armed to stand upon [their] own Defence; which if [they] are enabled to do, [they] shall never be put upon it, but [their] Swords may grow rusty in [their] hands; for that Nation is surest to live in Peace, that is most capable of making War; and a Man that hath a Sword by his side, shall have least occasion to make use of it." -- John Trenchard & Walter Moyle, "An Argument Shewing, That a Standing Army is Inconsistent With a Free Government, and Absolutely Destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy" [London, 1697] ("An Argument") - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: Texas CHL Holders Arrested Date: 19 Aug 1998 09:08:25 -0600 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Wed, 19 Aug 1998 08:54:06 -0600 Received: from fs1.mainstream.net by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id IAA17050; Wed, 19 Aug 1998 08:42:46 -0600 Received: (from smap@localhost) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id KAA15326; Wed, 19 Aug 1998 10:52:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1) by fs1.mainstream.net via smap (V1.3) id sma015025; Wed Aug 19 10:48:20 1998 Message-Id: Errors-To: listproc@mainstream.com Reply-To: KGrubb@carnival.com Originator: noban@mainstream.net Sender: noban@Mainstream.net Precedence: bulk X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline The extremist AGF Violence Policy Center had been bemoaning arrest rates = of Texas CHL (Concealed Handgun License) holders. Here's a clip to dispel = the nonsense. http://x4.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=3D370798002&CONTEXT=3D903534686.1022885= 917&h itnum=3D17 >Arrest statistics fuel fears over gun laws. >Cases involve 1,600 Texans with permits to carry concealed arms. >by John W. Gonzalez >Houston Chronicle Austin Bureau > >AUSTIN -- More than 1,600 Texans with permits to carry concealed handguns have >been arrested for state crimes since the "right-to-carry" law went into effect >in 1996, the Department of Public Safety said Friday. An issue was made of this previously by the Violence Police Center. Note that these numbers give permit holders an arrest rate of 8/1,000 permit holders. The arrest rate for Texas as a whole is 59.5/1,000 (17,993,000 = pop. 1,071,300 arrests, FBI UCR 1995) ... and 1,600 is for two years, not one. Ken Grubb Miami, FL - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: Jim Brady Op/Ed Date: 20 Aug 1998 15:50:43 -0600 Received: from kendaco.telebyte.com ([206.53.160.3]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Thu, 20 Aug 1998 07:33:32 -0600 Received: (from mail@localhost) by kendaco.telebyte.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id GAA10916; Thu, 20 Aug 1998 06:34:07 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: kendaco.telebyte.com: mail set sender to NRA-ILA-EVC-owner@kendaco.telebyte.com using -f Received: from hil-img-4.compuserve.com (hil-img-4.compuserve.com [149.174.177.134]) by kendaco.telebyte.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA10913 for ; Thu, 20 Aug 1998 06:34:06 -0700 Received: (from root@localhost) by hil-img-4.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.12) id JAA18177 for NRA-ILA-EVC@kendaco.telebyte.com; Thu, 20 Aug 1998 09:31:43 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <199808200931_MC2-56B3-4E37@compuserve.com> Reply-To: NRA-ILA-EVC@kendaco.telebyte.com Sender: NRA-ILA-EVC-owner@kendaco.telebyte.com Precedence: list X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by kendaco.telebyte.com id GAA10916 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline For those of you who do not have ready access to the Washington Post, I thought you would be interested in this article. I would like to know where he got the figure of "5000 children killed every year with guns" = came from. I sure looks like a number pulled out of the air to me. David Adams NRA-ILA-EVC, Virginia 7th NRA Second Amendmement Task Force Member wingedmonkey@compuserve.com http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/8358/ ___________________________________________________________________________= _____ Still Hostage to the Gun Lobby Shouldn't schoolchildren be as safe as Congressmen? By Jim Brady Monday, August 10, 1998; Page A17=20 I know what it's like to be on the receiving end of an assassin's bullet. = I know the importance of providing protection for public officials and those around them, and I grieve for the families of the two Capitol Police officers who were slain in the heroic performance of their duty. Should we take additional steps to protect "the People's House" and those who serve in it? Absolutely. And if it takes $120 million to build an underground visitors' center to afford that protection, let's do it. But what about the children of America? If the "People's House" deserves protection, what about the schoolhouses of America? Are we going to construct underground playgrounds to protect our children? I think not. Building fortresses may protect our government from gun violence, but it's not going to save children like Britthney Varner, one of four young girls shot to death on the school lawn by two of her classmates in Jonesboro, Ark. So what is Congress doing to protect America's children from gun violence?The answer is nothing. A few days before the shooting on Capitol Hill, the Senate voted against an amendment that would have required the sale of a child safety lock with every handgun and rejected a "safe storage" proposal that would have imposed criminal sanctions on gun owners who allow children to gain access to a loaded firearm. As if that was not enough, the Senate also passed an amendment by Sen. Bob Smith of New Hampshire that substantially will weaken the new background check system that is to go into effect this fall when the Brady waiting period expires. Then, a few days after the Capitol shooting, the Senate voted to allow the continued importation of "grandfathered" large-capacity ammunition clips = -- manufactured before the federal ban on assault weapons took effect -- that are designed to hold 15, 20, 30 or even 50 bullets. God forbid that the school assassins and drive-by shooters of America should run out of ammunition. And now the House is considering a bill that would make it legal and easy for millions of Americans to carry concealed pistols from state to state. None of this comes as a surprise. Earlier this year, Senate Majority = Leader Trent Lott told the National Rifle Association that the answer to gun violence in America is "a well-armed public." But isn't there something terribly wrong here? If the shooting of two Capitol police officers deserves a response, what about the more than 5,000 children killed every year with firearms? Can't we do something? This is not, as kids say, rocket science. Many of the guns that harm our children come from private homes. An estimated one out of four children between the ages of 10 and 17 have access to a loaded, unlocked gun in the home. One report estimates that nearly 1 million children carried a gun to school at some point in the past school year. And more than 5,000 children were expelled from school for carrying a gun. Responsible gun owners, and there are many, are ready to accept responsibility for the safe storage of their firearms, but Congress = doesn't see it that way. It might, it is argued, interfere with "the right to keep and bear arms." If we can't do the decent thing and require gun owners to keep loaded pistols out of the hands of young children, can't we at least give gun owners some assistance in locking up their guns? Yes, $120 million will build a fine visitors' center. But at a wholesale cost of less than $6 each, it also could be used to buy and distribute about 20 million child safety locks to gun-owning households, with instructions about the proper storage of firearms. But that, of course, would offend the gun lobby, = which insists that guns kept for self-defense should be kept loaded and ready at all times. The answer, it seems, comes down to this. The representatives who serve in "the People's House," already protected by one of the best-trained = security forces in the world, deserve an additional measure of security. Good for them. But as for the young children who get on a school bus every day and walk into the classroom carrying an armful of books, they should be satisfied with the occasional metal detector and what some school administrators now call "bullet drills." My sympathies and prayers are with the families of Jacob Chestnut and John Gibson. And with America's children. The writer was White House press secretary under President Ronald Reagan; he was shot during the attempt on Reagan's life in 1981.=20 =A9 Copyright 1998 The Washington Post Company ****Owning a firearm is a RIGHT, not a privilege**** The NRA ILA EVC closed mailing list is NOT an=20 official list of the NRA, but is offered as=20 a tool by Jim Kendall (WA-1st District EVC) and Telebyte NW. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send an email request to=20 NRA-1st@telebyte.com *********** Victory 1998! *************** - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: Jim Brady Op/Ed Date: 21 Aug 1998 18:12:00 -0700 On Thu, 20 Aug 1998 David Adams asked: >For those of you who do not have ready access to the Washington Post, I >thought you would be interested in this article. I would like to know >where he got the figure of "5000 children killed every year with guns" >came from. I sure looks like a number pulled out of the air to me. Apparently it came from the Children's Defense Fund Website or their sources for American children and teens from birth to age 19 who died from gunfire in 1995. Their number is 5,254. >Still Hostage to the Gun Lobby >Shouldn't schoolchildren be as safe as Congressmen? >By Jim Brady >Monday, August 10, 1998; Page A17 >If the shooting of two Capitol police officers deserves a response, >what about the more than 5,000 children killed every year with firearms? - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Joseph Waldron Subject: Re: Jim Brady Op/Ed Date: 22 Aug 1998 06:24:45 -0700 SCOTT BERGESON wrote: > On Thu, 20 Aug 1998 David Adams asked: > > >For those of you who do not have ready access to the Washington Post, I > >thought you would be interested in this article. I would like to know > >where he got the figure of "5000 children killed every year with guns" > >came from. I sure looks like a number pulled out of the air to me. > > Apparently it came from the Children's Defense Fund Website or their > sources for American children and teens from birth to age 19 who died > from gunfire in 1995. Their number is 5,254. > > >Still Hostage to the Gun Lobby > >Shouldn't schoolchildren be as safe as Congressmen? > >By Jim Brady > > >Monday, August 10, 1998; Page A17 > > > > >If the shooting of two Capitol police officers deserves a response, > >what about the more than 5,000 children killed every year with firearms? > Scott is correct. The 5,000+ figure was lifted from a "study" by the Children's Defense Fund published in the Spring of 1996. The "study" used raw numbers from the Center for Health Statistics, the highest possible number available. It included all "children" through age 19. I wrote an op-ed piece in rebuttal to the CDF piece that was published in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. I don't have it at home with me, but as I recall, the number is cut by about 1/3 when you remove the 18-19 year old young adults. A significant percentage were suicides--and there are several studies available showing the instrument used is NOT a factor in overall suicide rates. Most of the homicides included (muchof the remainder) were of individuals themselves involved in criminal activity. The same age breakdown is true of accidental shootings: take away 18-19 year olds and the figure is cut by nearly half; half again without 16-17 y/o's. The other dynamic to remember in accidental shootings is the horseplay factor. From age 2-10, the number of accidental shooting deaths in the U.S. annually is about 60-80 (7-9 per year for each year of that age group). At 11 we see a jump to 30-35, at 12 to 40 or so, and up into the 50s for 13-15 y/o's--the ages where young teenagers want to apply all the lessons they've learned watching garbage gun handling on TV and the silver screen. They continue to use the 1995 figures, even though more current (and lower) figures are available, because 1995 represents the high point for the decade. That 5,000+ plus figure is also the one divided by 365 when they talk about "15 children per day killed," etc, etc. Hope this helps put things in perspective. Joe W - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: NRA Action Alert: "No Gun Tax"!!! Date: 22 Aug 1998 07:25:00 -0700 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- FYI: NRA-ILA FAX ALERT 11250 Waples Mill Road * Fairfax, VA 22030 Phone: 1-800-392-8683 * Fax: 703-267-3918 * GROOTS@NRA.org Vol. 5, No. 33 8/21/98 TELL THEM "NO GUN TAX!" The official comment period is underway for the FBI's proposed $16.00 federal tax on gun purchasers. Gun owners are urged to take action now to stop the FBI from levying this tax. Before September 16, 1998, write a letter stating your opposition to the federal gun tax and recommending that the necessary funds to operate the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) be appropriated by Congress. Send your letter to: Mr. Emmet A. Rathbun, Unit Chief, Federal Bureau of Investigation, CJIS Division, 1000 Custer Hollow Road, Clarksburg, West Virginia 26306. For a copy of the proposed gun tax regulations call (304)625-2000 or visit the Government Printing Office web site at http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/aaces002.html and do a search for NICS. NOW is also the time to call your U.S. Representative and Senators while Congress is recessed and they are home in their local offices. Urge them to co-sponsor Rep. Bob Barr's "No Gun Tax Act of 1998" -- H.R. 3949 -- and to send their own comments against the tax to the FBI at the address above. "During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act" -George Orwell ********************************************************** Michael Moxley The Patriot Resource Center: mmoxley@foto.infi.net http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/6627/ **********************Live Free or Die!**********************<>< - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: Jim Brady Op/Ed Date: 22 Aug 1998 23:45:00 -0700 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Apparently it came from the Children's Defense Fund Website or their > sources for American children and teens from birth to age 19 who died > from gunfire in 1995. Their number is 5,254. Thanks Scott. I sent an email yesterday regarding an article that appeared in "School Board News", August 18, that used the figure of approx. 3000 kids each year die from gunfire. Rush Limbaugh is right, these guys pull numbers out of thin air and the general public are either not interested enough to question them or are simply too lazy. David Adams NRA-ILA-EVC, Va 7th NRA Second Amendment Task Force Member wingedmonkey@compuserve.com http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/8358/ - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: Men Biting Dogs Date: 23 Aug 1998 08:07:00 -0700 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- It's the "Man Bites Dog" factor. Remember the old anecdote? A reporter comes to his editor with a story about a dog biting a man. The editor says, "When a dog bites a man, that's not news. When a man bites a dog, _that's_ news." Now, a newspaper reader living in a city where nobody's even allowed to _own_ a dog wouldn't know much about dogs from personal experience. All he'd know about dogs is what he reads in the newspaper and sees on TV. And the _only_ stories he'd read in the newspaper or see on TV are about men biting dogs. He would never know that dogs bite men. His perception of reality is reversed by the editor's filtering out all "dog bites men" stories. If you said to him, "Dogs bite men 2.5 million times each year" he'd respond, "Well, I've never even seen a dog, and all I know about dogs is that men bite them." News editors decide what's news and what's not. When guns are used to kill and hurt innocent people, news editors decide it's news. When guns are used to defend innocent people, editors decide it's _not_ news. When a couple of kids in Jonesboro, Arkansas used guns to shoot up their school and murder their classmates, it was news. When, on September 16, 1993, at 8:30 PM in Palmdale, California, Jeffrey Storm, Jr. got his dad's gun out of his bedroom and chased away a burglar who had just shot his mom and dad, it wasn't news. Jeff's mom and dad, and the rest of Jeff's family, are alive today because Jeffrey Storm, Sr. believed in the Second Amendment, and taught his two sons, Jeff and Matthew, how to use a gun properly. And until either the news editors are convinced to change that policy -- or until we can get around the establishment news filters with the truth -- we will never win the battle for the Second Amendment. J. Neil Schulman, Webmaster The World Wide Web Gun Defense Clock http://pulpless.com/gunclock/ http://www,netstorage.com/pulpless/gunclock.html > On 10 Jul 98 at 9:20, stevechr@ptd.net wrote: > > Larry Pratt said, "Guns save lives." > > Sara Brady responded, "If guns saved lives, this would be the safest > > country on earth." > > What would be a witty riposte to Sara Brady's soundbite? > How about, "It is." We haven't been invaded since 1812 and our > violent crime figures compare favorably with those of most countries. > The only hotspots are prohibition related gang warfare in cities with > strict victim disarmament laws. > I saw figures the other day to the effect that violent crime is > dropping year by year but REPORTING of it is up. The fuss is all > over a mistaken perception generated by the media. > In Liberty, > Rich > Guns save lives - maybe yours. > -------------------- > Rich Loether University of Pittsburgh > EMail: rjl+@pitt.edu Computing & Info Services > Voice: (412) 624-6429 600 Epsilon Drive > FAX: (412) 624-6436 Pittsburgh, PA 15238 > Without Prejudice, UCC 1-207 > finger for PGP 2.6.2 public key > Key Fingerprint 53 76 0B 73 DF 5C D9 14 D0 C3 68 20 DE 4F 60 C0 > --------------------------- > The Constitution of the Commonwealth of > Pennsylvania guarantees your right to bear > arms in Article 1 Section 21: "The right of > Citizens to bear arms in defense of > themselves and the State shall not > be questioned." -- "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." - Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, THE SIGN OF FOUR J. Neil Schulman / Pulpless.Com Voice & Fax: (500) 44-JNEIL Internet: jneil@pulpless.com Personal Web Page: http://pulpless.com/jneil/ Browse sample chapters of new books by bestselling authors, pay online with a credit card, then download books in HTML or Adobe Acrobat format from the web at http://pulpless.com/ - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: chardy@ES.COM (Charles Hardy) Subject: [LPUtah Press Release] Date: 24 Aug 1998 10:33:22 -0600 FYI, ----BEGIN FORWARDED MESSGE---- Libertarian Party of Utah Salt Lake City, Ut For Immediate Release: The Libertarian Party of Utah today commended Utah Representative Jim Hansen (R) for his candid and honest remarks made last Tuesday (11 August, 98) at the Logan Lions Club expressing his personal desire to have a gun in his possession while in Washington D.C. They also praised him for admitting the so-called Brady law is an abject failure and called on him to put legislation where his mouth is and work to protect citizens' right to armed self-defense. "Rep. Hansen seems to be right in touch with the majority of Utah's electorate on this issue," said Libertarian Party state chair Jim Dexter. "Utahns have always rejected waiting periods as unconstitutional infringements of our most basic right to effective, armed defense. We also require the state to issue concealed weapons permits to any competent, law-abiding adult who can show basic proficiency with a firearm." The Libertarian Party called on Rep. Hansen to sponsor legislation to repeal the Brady law and to guarantee that a person legally allowed to carry a gun for self defense in any State could legally do so in the District of Columbia and federal territories. "While we are pleased with Rep. Hansen's comments," said Dexter, "it is, frankly, time for elected politicians to start walking the walk rather than just talking the talk. The federal government must honor all the rights of all citizens, including the right to armed self-defense. While certain buildings may require limited access--and weapons to be secured with security personnel before entering--it is unconscionable for the federal government to provide vast areas including Washington D.C., National Parks, and federal territories which are really safe zones for criminals where they know their intended victims have been disarmed. We implore Congressman Hansen to now introduce and vigorously support legislation to allow citizens to take the common sense measures he, himself, has said he would like to take. If a Congressman, entitled to federal police protection, doesn't feel safe in our nation's capital, how does he think common citizens must feel? " ----END FORWARDED MESSAGE---- -- "To avoid domestic tyranny, the people must be armed to stand upon [their] own Defence; which if [they] are enabled to do, [they] shall never be put upon it, but [their] Swords may grow rusty in [their] hands; for that Nation is surest to live in Peace, that is most capable of making War; and a Man that hath a Sword by his side, shall have least occasion to make use of it." -- John Trenchard & Walter Moyle, "An Argument Shewing, That a Standing Army is Inconsistent With a Free Government, and Absolutely Destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy" [London, 1697] ("An Argument") - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: Mrs. Clintons 1974 report on impeachment of Nixon Date: 24 Aug 1998 11:01:13 -0600 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Mon, 24 Aug 1998 07:00:41 -0600 Received: from fs1.mainstream.net by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id GAA20878; Mon, 24 Aug 1998 06:49:15 -0600 Received: (from smap@localhost) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id IAA21052; Mon, 24 Aug 1998 08:58:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1) by fs1.mainstream.net via smap (V1.3) id sma020844; Mon Aug 24 08:57:12 1998 Message-Id: Errors-To: listproc@mainstream.com Reply-To: pwatson@utdallas.edu Originator: noban@mainstream.net Sender: noban@Mainstream.net Precedence: bulk X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline ---------- Forwarded message ---------- An open letter to Hillary=20 =20 Dear Mrs. Clinton:=20 In February 1974 the staff of the Nixon impeachment inquiry issued a report produced by a group of lawyers and researchers assigned with developing a scholar memorandum setting forth the "constitutional grounds for presidential impeachment."=20 You were a member of that group of lawyers and researchers, barely, I am sure, able to conceal your dislike for President Nixon. Within the year, Nixon would leave office disgraced , having witnessed articles of impeachment voted against him by the House Judiciary Committee, based in part on your report.=20 Relevant Today I must give you and your colleagues credit. You did not appear to have let personal animus influence your work product, at least not the final, published report. In fact, the report you and your colleagues produced appears objective, fair, well researched and consistent with other materials reflecting and commenting on impeachment. And it is every bit as relevant today as it was 23 years ago.=20 I presume -- but I must ask whether -- you stand by your research and analysis today. You said in 1974 that impeachment, as understood by the framers of our constitution, reflected the long history of the term used at least since late-14th-century England: "one of the tools used by the English" to make government "more responsive and responsible" (page 4 of your report). You also noted then -- clearly in response to those who mistakenly claimed impeachment as a tool to correct "corruption in office" that "alleged damage to the state," was "not necessarily limited to common law or statutory ... Crimes" (page 7)=20 You quoted James Wilson, who at the Pennsylvania ratification convention described the executive (that is, the president) as not being above the law, but rather "in his public character" subject to it "by impeachment" (page 9)=20 You also -- quite correctly -- noted then that the constitutional draftsmen chose the terms describing the circumstances under which a president could be impeached very carefully and deliberately. You noted that "high crimes and misdemeanors" did not denote criminal offenses in the sense that prosecutors employ such terms in modern trials. Rather, in your well-researched memorandum, you correctly noted that the phrase "high crimes and misdemeanors" was substituted for George Mason's less precise term in an earlier draft of the Constitution: "Maladministration" (page 12 of your report). Not only that, but your further research led you to quote Blackstone's "Commentaries on the Laws of England" in support of your conclusion that "high crimes and misdemeanors" meant not a criminal offense but an injury to the state or system of government (page 12). I applaud the extent and clarity of your research. You even note that the U.S. Supreme Court, in deciding questions of intent, must construe phrases such as "high crimes and misdemeanors" not according to modern usage, but according to what the framers meant when they adopted them (page 12 once again).=20 Magnificent research!=20 Even Alexander Hamilton finds a place in your research. You quote from his Federalist No. 65 that impeachment relates to "misconduct of public men, or in other words, from the abuse or violation of public trust" that is "of a nature ... POLITICAL [emphasis in original]" (page 13 of your report).=20 Finally, in bringing your research forward from the constitutional drafting documents themselves, you find support for your properly broad interpretation of "high crimes and misdemeanors" in no less a legal scholar than Justice Joseph Story. I was in awe of your use of Justice Story's "Commentaries on the Constitution" (1833) supporting your proposition that "impeachment ... applies to offenses of a political character ... [that] must be examined upon very broad and comprehensive principles of public policy and duty" (pages 16 and 17 of your report). I could not have said it better.=20 You even note that the specific instances on which impeachment has been employed in our country's history "placed little emphasis on criminal conduct" and were used to remove public officials who had "seriously undermined public confidence" through their "course of conduct" (page 21).=20 Clear Basis=20 Mrs. Clinton, when I first raised the notion last month that the House should take but the first step in determining whether impeachment might lie against President Clinton for a pattern of abuse of office and improper administration of his duties, little did I realize your scholarly work 23 years ago would provide clear historical and legal basis and precedent for my proposition.=20 Amazingly, the words you used in your report are virtually identical to those I use today. For example, you said in 1974, much as I did in my March 11, 1997, letter to Judiciary Chairman Hyde, that "[i]mpeachment is the first step in a remedial process" (page 24 of your report) to correct "serious offenses" that "subvert" our government and "undermine the integrity of office" (page 26).=20 Thank you, Mrs. Clinton, for giving Congress a road map for beginning our inquiry.=20 Sincerely,=20 Bob Barr (R., GA.)=20 Member of Congress=20 =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D This mailing list is for discussion of Clinton Administration Scandals. If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing list, send electronic mail to majordomo@majordomo.pobox.com. In the message body put: unsubscribe cas - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: Armed agents without accountability Date: 24 Aug 1998 19:16:00 -0700 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Newsgroups: alt.politics.media,alt.news-media,alt.politics.usa.misc, talk.politics.guns,alt.politics.clinton,misc.legal.atl.law-enforcement, alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.g-gordon-liddy >*Armed agents without accountability >"[The high number of armed federal agents] is not being blown out of >proportion. For one thing, the number of 75,000 is probably already >outdated. It's very likely to be about 85,000, and growing at that rate >each year at least. There's a real question I think, even apart from >whether it's constitutionally permissible to have federal law >enforcement agencies, outside a very narrow range of activity, and that >is: where is the accountability for the ones we already have? We hear >from the gun control proponents, people who want to restrict our right >to keep and bear arms, that if you and I have a gun and we're out where >some jerk cuts us off in traffic, or we're going to go into a bar and >get into a volatile situation, somehow that's going to lead to violence. Blame us in the religious right. If our grandparents had not pushed the issue of prohibition, there would not have been a break down in society in the 1920s. This caused the formation of the Federal law enforcement due to local government decay. >Not only does that not happen, but the fact of the matter is, we have >federal agents committing outrages. Whether it's Waco, or at Ruby Ridge >against the Weaver family, where the FBI had to pay over three million >dollars to end the judicial process, or else they really get washed. Or >a lot of other 'oops, sorry, we got the wrong place. Sorry, we tore >your house up. Sorry you died of a heart attack.' That sort of thing >just doesn't result in any accountability," said Larry Pratt, President >of Gun Owners of America, on "Endangered Liberties". Marc Morano, an >investigative reporter for "American Investigator", who last week >reported on the armed agents of the Fish and Wildlife Service, echoed >Pratt's concerns for accountability. Morano explained, "We found a >common trait among all the stories. All the agents were armed, they all >wore flak jackets, and they all had bad attitudes. And what would >happen, is, they would raid these people's private homes, and >essentially violate all these people's rights in their own home, and >there's no retribution. There's no accountability. And I think that's >what is most disturbing-there's no one doing anything about it - no one >knows about it." Federal Law Enforcement officers are quiting in record numbers. It is the same with the military. While everyone at the Federal level likes passing laws and regulations, enforcement is too "working class". College boys do not like getting their hands dirty. Most law enforcement is still at the local level. Over 550,000 officers. In fact half of that number is in departments with less than 17 LEOs on staff. If you notice, the Feds are trying to get state and local government to do their dirty work. The Feds want to pass the laws then make local government pay to do the clean up. All government is still local. >Contact: Producer, Joe Starrs @ 202.546.3000 >Editor's Note: The author of the Direct Line Commentary appearing in the >August 9th issue of Notable News Now, should have been identified as J. >Bradley Keena. >Watch all Free Congress Programming in RealVideo on the Internet: >http://www.freecongress.org/ - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: CIA created HCI? Date: 24 Aug 1998 19:16:00 -0700 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Newsgroups: alt.law-enforcement,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh, alt.fan.g-gordon-liddy,talk.politics.guns,talk.politics.libertarian, alt.politics.usa.republican Drgwarwhr wrote in message <1998081410224800.GAA21435@ladder03.news.aol.com>... >For the record: >The CIA is the largest and best funded terrorist onganization on the >planet. It is a rogue institution that is capible of anything but the >right thing. This organization is not citizen friendly and has the >attitude of a paranoid coke-head that is armed to the teeth. As far as I >am concerned, the CIA started smuggling Cocaine for their own consumption. >(DARE to drug test the CIA) They sure act like a bunch of tweakers. Being >SPUN is part of their job. The Right wing militias have the ATF; the Left wing extremists have always had the CIA. >This government seems determined to turn this country into a police state. >What better excuse for tanks in the streets than terrorists with nukes and >Biological weapons. The way I see it, this government would have the most >to gain in a domestic terror campaign. If that was not the case, the >government would not be fighting this drug war and supplying the drugs at >the same time. >When the drug war goes sour, the threat of domestic terrorism with nukes >and biological weapons is the next logical step. So don't be surprised >when it happens. Now, since the HCI and other anti-gun groups were started by a bunch of folks retired from the CIA, where does that leave us? >Sincerely, >Jay Lindberg >PS. Our chances of being shot in the back by a cop are a lot better >than being on the recieving end of a Nuke. >Drgwarwhr@aol.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: PA background check database 1/2 Date: 24 Aug 1998 19:16:00 -0700 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- X-Web-Site: http://www.efga.org/ X-Mail-List-Info: http://efga.org/about/maillist/ X-SCAN: http://www.networkusa.org/fingerprint.shtml http://www.post-gazette.com:80/regionstate/19980823bchecks2.asp Pennsylvania Instant Background Checks are being used to create a database of gun owners. Quoting from the article - "The state is building a database to eliminate the problem, but it will not be in place for a few months, Lewis said." "When dealers call PICS with a buyer's driver's license or state identification number, the system automatically checks four state databases -- criminal history, warrants, protection from abuse orders and mental health -- and a pool of eight federal databases, including the National Crime Information Clearinghouse." Critics take aim at instant checks Pa.'s new gun application process gets mixed reviews Sunday, August 23, 1998 By Mike Bucsko, Post-Gazette Staff Writer On Monday afternoon, Anthony Jackson went into a Wilkinsburg gun shop and asked its employees to process an application for him so he could buy a handgun from another dealer. The application went through the Pennsylvania Instant Check System, the state's 8-week-old electronic background check system. PICS turned up an outstanding warrant on Jackson for jumping bail. State police in suburban Harrisburg, where the PICS system is located, notified Wilkinsburg police within minutes, and they arrested Jackson, 42, of East Liberty. Jackson's arrest during a handgun purchase is one of four in Allegheny County and a dozen statewide since the PICS system began July 1. It is an example of why Gov. Ridge pushed for the new background check system -- to keep weapons out of the hands of criminals. But some local gun dealers said the PICS system also was keeping handguns out of the hands of citizens entitled to possess them. Before July 1, people who wanted to buy handguns in Pennsylvania had to wait five days under federal law until the local county sheriff's office completed a background check. The $3.5 million PICS system replaced the five-day waiting period with what were supposed to be immediate background checks. Prospective handgun buyers could receive approval within minutes if they had no prior history of certain criminal convictions, such as crimes that involved violence and drugs; protection from abuse orders; or mental illness that resulted in an involuntary hospital commitment. PICS has a $3.7 million budget this year. Some of the "instant" checks occurred within two or three minutes, but others took 15 or 20 minutes, tying up gun shop employees on telephones. Each time a dealer requests a background check, it costs $2, so dealers can hang up and pay another $2 for a new call, or, they can remain on the phone until they are told the application is approved, denied or will take longer for review. And the "instant" checks only occur in two-thirds of the cases. The remaining third of handgun purchase applications are put on "pending" status while PICS workers check details in the buyers' backgrounds that delay approval. For buyers with clean records, a conviction that was never expunged, a clerical error on a birth date or a mix-up over a name might cause the delay. The delays can take anywhere from a few hours to several weeks. Some customers have become impatient and decided they don't want the guns after all. "When it works purely automated, it's fine," said George Romanoff, owner of Ace Sporting Goods Inc. in South Strabane, one of Western Pennsylvania's largest weapons dealers. "We don't want people who aren't supposed to have firearms to have firearms. But the way this is operating, it's really putting a severe damper on our business." Dealers expect the problem with the delays to get worse later this year when background checks will be required for the purchase of rifles and shotguns in addition to handguns, which will about double the amount of applications that will go through PICS. [ Continued In Next Message... ] - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: PA background check database 2/2 Date: 24 Aug 1998 19:16:00 -0700 "I think it will have a long-term detrimental effect (on business)," said J.R. Moore, manager of Braverman Arms Co. Inc. in Wilkinsburg, the store where Jackson was arrested. But not all dealers are dissatisfied with PICS. Smaller gun shops have not had the problems with delays that larger businesses, such as Braverman and Ace, have experienced. "We have no problems with the system," said Mike Rapino Sr., owner of Sharpsburg Gun and Tackle. "There are delays, but they're not presenting a problem. We're comfortable with them. We'd rather make sure the right people get the guns, even if it takes a week." PICS, which operates out of the state police headquarters building near Harrisburg, is prepared to handle the estimated 1 million requests it will receive in its first year of operation, state police spokesman Jack Lewis said. But Lewis acknowledged that PICS has had some problems and will probably continue to have problems while kinks are being worked out during its initial operation. For instance, dealers complain that errors such as inaccurate birth dates are not corrected once a buyer's application is approved. So the next time the same person tries to buy a handgun, the application approval will be delayed while PICS workers check for the same problem. And the burden is on the buyer to prove that the problem is due to an error. The state is building a database to eliminate the problem, but it will not be in place for a few months, Lewis said. PICS also might have to hire additional workers or add telephone lines to keep up with demand. PICS now employs 52 people with 29 cubicles, where operators can take calls for background checks on 36 telephone lines from 8 a.m. to 10 p.m. When dealers call PICS with a buyer's driver's license or state identification number, the system automatically checks four state databases -- criminal history, warrants, protection from abuse orders and mental health -- and a pool of eight federal databases, including the National Crime Information Clearinghouse. The FBI is hiring dozens of additional workers at its Clarksburg, W.Va., records center to handle demand from Pennsylvania and other states for the background checks. On its first day of operation, PICS was unable to process any applications for five hours because the federal system was not available. Dealers have complained that they have gotten recorded messages at PICS advising them to call back because the system is not available. There is no backup system if PICS is not working. If there is a question about a record, the automated PICS system bounces to an operator, who will try to resolve the problem. If it cannot be resolved within what Lewis called a "reasonable" time, the application will be placed on pending status. The dealer is to be notified within five days whether the application is approved, denied or will take longer for review. However, Romanoff and other dealers said they had not received notification after the five-day period on several occasions. If the application is denied, the buyer can appeal to the state. If the appeal is turned down, a further appeal can go to the state attorney general's office and then to Commonwealth Court. But the system doesn't always operate smoothly, and notification is not guaranteed, either of the application status or of the appeal. Romanoff and his business operations manager, Pam Gayarski, have compiled a four-page list of 15 separate instances in which PICS had problems. The problems range from one buyer whose paperwork apparently was misplaced and therefore unnecessarily delayed to instances in which the PICS system did not operate at all because of problems with its databases. One problem the dealers cited concerns people who have licenses to carry a firearm. Before July 1, these people could walk into a gun shop and walk out with a handgun without a background check. But they can no longer do that. Buyers with so-called "carry" licenses have to undergo background checks with everyone else, though they were subjected to background checks when they received their licenses. This has caused many complaints to Harrisburg, Lewis said. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: Impeachment Blitz Date: 25 Aug 1998 13:01:33 -0600 Received: from vader.thnet.com ([206.98.115.1]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Tue, 25 Aug 1998 06:08:46 -0600 Received: from bruce17.thnet.com (bruce28.thnet.com [206.98.115.128]) by vader.thnet.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA05956; Tue, 25 Aug 1998 07:00:07 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199808251200.HAA05956@vader.thnet.com> Comments: Authenticated sender is Organization: The Vigo Examiner Reply-to: Distribution@Vigo-Examiner.com Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.23) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline LETTER Impeachment Blitz *** Time for postcard blitz with phone follow up. *** KISS - Keep It Short and Simple. Very important. Simply say 2 things in BIG, plain letters: Impeach Clinton NOW. Post the Starr Report on the Internet AS SOON as it = is received. That's all you need to say. Send them to your 2 Senators and 1 Representative plus all supporters in Congress. Congress likes to play = show and tell and can take stacks of post cards to the floor. C-SPAN will see your cards. The media will notice your cards. That could be the influence we need. Cards, letters, e-mail, and telephone calls will all help for any issue. But, this time, we need postcards. They are easy to stack up and take to the floor of Congress. Please distribute this letter widely before sending your own cards. = Please keep your groups organized so we can get this very necessary chore done. For more information, please read Heads Up #99. Simply click the headline at the top of page at my website at http://www.uhuh.com You can find your Congress Critters addresses at http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/ Let's each of us get 100 more people to send postcards. Let's really blitz Congress! This letter will be posted in Blitz Central at http://www.uhuh.com Click = on Blitz. Yours in liberty, Forest forest@uhuh.com http://www.Vigo-Examiner.com TEXT VERSION Enjoy a free 90 day trial subscription to The Vigo Examiner. You will receive one to three of our top articles each day. =20 Send your subscription request, and all other communication to Editor@Vigo-Examiner.com. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: First Computer Chip Implant Date: 26 Aug 1998 07:49:00 -0700 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From the AP Mike P Professor claims to receive first chip implant 12.08 p.m. ET (1609 GMT) August 25, 1998 READING, England -- Professor Kevin Warwick claimed on Tuesday to be the first person in the world to have a computer chip surgically implanted into his body. Warwick told a news conference that a glass capsule about one inch long and one-tenth of an inch wide containing an electromagnetic coil and a silicon chip was inserted into his arm on Monday. "It is a research experiment. I don't know how long we will leave the implant in but it's looking at what's possible now in terms of communicating between a computer and myself,'' Warwick said. Warwick is head of the Cybernetics Department at the University of Reading. He demonstrated the chip in action by walking through the front door of his department. "Good morning, Professor Warwick. You have five new E mails,'' said a computerized voice activated by the inserted chip. The human as computer had many applications, but also dangers, Warwick said. "Possibilities could be that anyone who wanted access to a gun could do so only if they had one of these implants,'' he said. "Then if they actually try and enter a school or building that doesn't want them in there, the school computer would sound alarms and warn people inside or even prevent them having access. "The same could be true at work where employees could be tracked in and out of the building to see when they are there. "This is a technology where there are big positives but there are also big negatives. Do we want to hand over control to machinery or to have buildings telling us what we can do or can't do?'' "I'm really looking at what's technically possible. I'm excited about the future prospects, particularly the human body communicating and interacting with a computer. There are a lot of exciting possibilities.'' Warwick said the chip was implanted by his own doctor, who advised him to have it removed within 10 days. There was a danger of infection, although Warwick was taking antibiotics. Reading University said in a statement that this was the first chip to be surgically inserted into a human. "It is therefore not known what effects it will have, how well it will operate and how robust it will be. Professor Warwick is therefore taking an enormous risk -- for the transponder to leak or shatter within his body could be catastrophic,'' the statement said. Warwick shrugged off the dangers. "It doesn't hurt any. I took some Nurofen just before the operation. It feels uncomfortable; it feels as though there's something in my arm, but it doesn't feel unpleasant.'' "Cybernetics is all about humans and technology interacting. For a professor of cybernetics to become a true Cyborg -- part man, part machine -- is therefore rather appropriate,'' Warwick said. comments@foxnews.com ============================================= To unsubscribe, write to pi-request@involved.com with "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. (Without the quote marks.) - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: CNN Has More Than Hurricane Bonnie To Contend With Date: 26 Aug 1998 14:33:23 -0600 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Wed, 26 Aug 1998 11:19:02 -0600 Received: from fs1.mainstream.net by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id LAA23024; Wed, 26 Aug 1998 11:07:34 -0600 Received: (from smap@localhost) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id NAA03543; Wed, 26 Aug 1998 13:17:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1) by fs1.mainstream.net via smap (V1.3) id sma003176; Wed Aug 26 13:12:25 1998 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980826113827.0068a170@mail.swbell.net> Errors-To: listproc@mainstream.com Reply-To: rgustav@swbell.net Originator: noban@mainstream.net Sender: noban@Mainstream.net Precedence: bulk X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline >Return-Path: >From: admin@hackworth.com >X-Sender: hwadmin@mail.cyberport.net >Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1998 15:48:52 -0600 >To: (Recipient list suppressed) >Subject: CNN Has More Than Hurricane Bonnie To Contend With Wednesday=3D20= >X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mail1.rcsntx.swbell.net id SAA06613 > >CNN Has More Than Hurricane Bonnie To Contend With Wednesday=3D20 > > Atlanta, GA, Aug, 26th=3D85 CNN executives and staffers minds may = be on the >pending hurricane, but on Wednesday, August 26th, they are going to come >face-to-face with some of the Vietnam War veterans which they had earlier >this year branded as "War Criminals".=3D20 > > The veterans, most of whom represent the now-famous MACVSOG and = other >Special Forces units in Vietnam, their friends and families promise an >entirely peaceful demonstration of their dissatisfaction of CNN and >Time-Warner=3D92s handling of their erroneous, patently false, and=3D subsequently >totally discredited, production of "Tailwind - Valley of Death" story. > > The veterans' charge that CNN & Time-Warner have not acted = responsibly, >fairly nor in any good faith whatsoever in correcting their Tailwind = story >errors and omissions. > > The issues are essentially those which CNN had promised the = Special Forces >and Special Operations Associations they would do. Standard things that a >media organization must do when they have wronged and defamed an = honorable >and honest group of people. > > The veterans' demands are very straightforward -- > > * An apology for the wanton defamation of their character, = integrity and >conduct during their service in the Vietnam War. A genuine and sincere >public apology for CNN=3D92s egregious errors in this story. Ted Turner = has >stated that he owes them a public apology, but he has not gotten around = to >making it. The group will visit his headquarters Wednesday, fully = expecting >to collect on this debt. And to see it broadcast in the same manner as = the >original story.=3D20 > > * A REAL retraction to the reckless disregard for the truth they >demonstrated in the original Operation Tailwind story. Not a wimpy, lame >"We can=3D92t prove it at this time=3D85" statement. That is not a = retraction, >that's further insult. A front page retraction that starts with "We were >wrong and we=3D92re sorry" retraction is what the vets are demanding.=3D20= > > * The removal of ALL offending and conspiratorial staff involved = in the >production of this libelous program. Minimally this must include Rick >Kaplan and Peter Arnett. Continuation of their retention at CNN is >absolutely intolerable to the veteran community. This is certainly not = the >first offense for either of them.=3D20 > > * Equal Air Time to correct the damages which CNN has done to all = Vietnam >War veterans. To show the real Operation Tailwind story and correct the >misnomers about all veterans which this kind of story perpetuates. = =3D91Equal >air time=3D92 means prime time Sunday night=3D85 just as the original = lies were >broadcast and not once, but twice.=3D20 > > * Compensation to those directly damaged by this malicious = campaign. >Including both the American GI=3D92s and the Montagnard communities here = in >this country.=3D20 > >Vets' Message To CNN Is Simple --=3D20 > > The Issue Is Not Going To Go Away & Neither Are American = Veterans!=3D20 >Until such point as CNN addresses these grievances sincerely, honestly = and >in straightforward fashion, it will not be forgotten and will not go = away. >Plain and simple.=3D20 >=3D20 >You Are Invited --=3D20 > > To the peaceful gathering at CNN headquarters in Atlanta, Georgia, = on >Wednesday, August 26 from 11 AM until 3 PM to witness firsthand how CNN >executives and staff answer to these grievances face-to-face with the >community they wrongly accuse of being war criminals.=3D20 > >Media Contact =3D97=3D20 >J.R. Tobin=3D20 >(704) 545-0585 Office=3D20 >(704) 564-2224 Mobile=3D20 > > > > By all means send to your members. Ask them to further distribute,= too. > > Regarding attendees, inform them that this is to be a first rate >professional protest and that they should go to the Tailwind Info Center >referenced on the Press Release and read the Op Ord listed under "Join Us >In Atlanta" and be prepared to conform to the instructions. Tell them = that >anyone attending must adhere to the op order. > > The links, if you want to mail directly from the html pages as I = did are >http://www.GreenBeret.Net/Tailwind/PressInfo/Announcements/8-26%20Press%20= >Release.htm >for the press release and >http://www.GreenBeret.Net/Tailwind/Misc/OpOrd-10-26-98-Atlanta.html > > I would just caution them about showing up to participate without = being >thoroughly familiar with the op ord and being in proper and professional >accordance with the dress code outlined therein. This will be STRICTLY >enforced. Absolutely no camo. > > Other than that, fling as far and wide as you can.=3D20 > > Thanks a lot, > >-- Bob Golden > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: Re: Gunsmiths & Brady (fwd) Date: 27 Aug 1998 10:14:31 -0600 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Thu, 27 Aug 1998 07:48:19 -0600 Received: from fs1.mainstream.net by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id HAA23875; Thu, 27 Aug 1998 07:36:48 -0600 Received: (from smap@localhost) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id JAA04195; Thu, 27 Aug 1998 09:45:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1) by fs1.mainstream.net via smap (V1.3) id sma003978; Thu Aug 27 09:42:34 1998 Message-Id: Errors-To: listproc@mainstream.com Reply-To: pwatson@utdallas.edu Originator: noban@mainstream.net Sender: noban@Mainstream.net Precedence: bulk X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Surprise! Surprise! Surpise! Ken Rineer wrote ... > When the permanent provisions of Brady go into effect on Nov 30th, if > = you take a firearm to have any repairs made to it, when you pick it=20 > up, you will have to fill out the new form the ATF has designed. Had enough, yet? It's even "better" than that. You'll have to pass an FBI background check -- on a gun you may have owned for _decades_ -- and if you don't pass, the gunsmith confiscates your weapon.=20 Had enough, yet? Even if you do pass, you'll have to pay a $16.00 charge for the "service" of having had your metaphorical rectum probed by the government.=20 Had enough, yet? The same transparently unconstitutional strictures apply to pawnshops.=20 Had enough, yet? Friends, the most important thing to know about = this mess right now is that the _Republicans_ and the _NRA_ did it to us. The Democrats would never have been able to accomplish it without them.=20 Had enough, yet? The best thing you can do is write whatever squamous, fetid, pile of cretinous dung calls himself your Republican representative or Senator and inform him that if this blantantly illegal garbage isn't repealed, _right now_ -- along with the Ugly Gun and Magazine ban attributed to Clinton, but actually the brainchild of Jack Kemp and William Bennett -- then it's going to be the end of the Republican Party.=20 Had enough, yet? If you're interested in learning how (or sending the Elephant Boys another message), feel free to read, download, and pass along what you find at:=20 http://www.webleyweb.com/tle/le970601-01.html and:=20 http://www.webleyweb.com/tle/le970701-02.html Had enough, yet? I guarantee that this is the _only_ effective tactic left to us. But it is a good one, and it will succeed if you're willing to do the minimum work of getting it to Republican incumbents and candidates, and apssing it along to people on our side who will do the same.=20 If you aren't willing, give up any idea that we're better and stronger that the Brits, the Australians, or the Canadians. We ourselves will have been the major culprits in the destruction of American = liberty.=20 Had enough, yet? What's it gonna be, friends? A future of freedom or a future in chains? It's up to you.=20 L. Neil Smith Author, _The Probability Broach_, _Pallas_, et al. -- ********************************************************************** Declare your own website a BILL OF RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT site today!! The vile reign of state terrorism is drawing to a close at long last. A new day is dawning for _liberty_. You can share in making history. Go to http://www.webleyweb.com/lneil/index.html and click on the scroll.=20 ********************************************************************** - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Will Thompson Subject: Re: [LPUtah Press Release] Date: 27 Aug 1998 11:44:42 -0600 Charles Hardy wrote: > > FYI, > > ----BEGIN FORWARDED MESSGE---- > > Libertarian Party of Utah > Salt Lake City, Ut > [...snip...] > > "Rep. Hansen seems to be right in touch with the majority of Utah's > electorate on this issue," said Libertarian Party state chair Jim > Dexter. "Utahns have always rejected waiting periods as > unconstitutional infringements of our most basic right to effective, > armed defense. We also require the state to issue concealed weapons > permits to any competent, law-abiding adult who can show basic > proficiency with a firearm." > > The Libertarian Party called on Rep. Hansen to sponsor legislation to > repeal the Brady law and to guarantee that a person legally allowed to > carry a gun for self defense in any State could legally do so in the > District of Columbia and federal territories. > [...snip...] > Thanks and Kudos to the LPU and Jim for making the statement! Welcome! But.... Is it really the position of the LPU that "our most basic right to effective, armed defense." can be given or taken away by "the state" which issues "concealed weapons permits to any competent, law-abiding adult who can show basic proficiency with a firearm." and that the state may "allow" ... "a person"..." to carry a gun for self defense"? Will - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: GSL> cnjs/colt's Date: 27 Aug 1998 12:50:48 -0600 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Wed, 26 Aug 1998 22:31:44 -0600 Received: from listbox.com by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id WAA23574; Wed, 26 Aug 1998 22:20:14 -0600 Received: (qmail 14030 invoked by uid 516); 27 Aug 1998 04:30:27 -0000 Delivered-To: rkba-co@majordomo.pobox.com Received: (qmail 14016 invoked from network); 27 Aug 1998 04:30:22 -0000 Received: from growl.pobox.com (208.210.124.27) by majordomo.pobox.com with SMTP; 27 Aug 1998 04:30:22 -0000 Received: from mail2.rockymtn.net (ns2.rockymtn.net [166.93.8.2]) by growl.pobox.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id AAA29236 for ; Thu, 27 Aug 1998 00:30:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from 166-93-76-1.rmi.net (166-93-76-1.rmi.net [166.93.76.1]) by mail2.rockymtn.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id WAA28901; Wed, 26 Aug 1998 22:23:48 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <199808270423.WAA28901@mail2.rockymtn.net> X-Sender: davisda@shell.rmi.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.1.2 Sender: owner-rkba-co.new@majordomo.pobox.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rkba-co@majordomo.pobox.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Posted to rkba-co by Douglas Davis ----------------------- >Return-Path: >Delivered-To: gsl@majordomo.pobox.com >From: >Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1998 01:24:36 EDT >To: gsl@listbox.com >Subject: GSL> cnjs/colt's >Sender: owner-gsl@listbox.com >Reply-To: gsl@listbox.com > >----------------------------------------- http://GunsSaveLives.com > Coalition of New Jersey Sportsmen > Richard Miller - Chairman > 2316 Lyde Place - Scotch Plains, NJ 07076 - Fax 908 889-5931 > > >August 14, 1998 > > OPEN LETTER TO THE PUBLIC > >Re: CNJS Calling off Boycott against Colt's and Full Retraction of Claims = Made >against Colt's > >The Coalition of New Jersey Sportsmen made accusatory statements against >Colt's >Manufacturing Company, Inc., its President Ron Stewart, and its Chairman >Donald >Zilkha. These statements were broadly disseminated and made several weeks = ago, >during and around the time of NRA Show in Philadelphia. > >We said that Colt's, Mr. Stewart and Mr. Zilkha took actions that = threatened >Second >Amendment Rights and other actions that were contrary to our interest. = Among >the >charges, we accused Colt's of seeking the passage of legislation that = would >outlaw >guns that did not use smart gun technology. We accused Mr. Stewart of >mismanagement and placing Colt's in dire financial condition. We also = accused >Colt's, >and later Mr. Zilkha, of contributing to Charles Schumer's campaign*. = Finally, >we >called for a boycott against Colt's. > >We now realize that we were given erroneous and false information and = drew the >wrong conclusions. Therefore, we unconditionally retract everything we = said >negative >about Colt's, Mr. Stewart and Mr. Zilkha. We are very sorry for what we = did >and only >wish that we had made this retraction sooner. In light of our serious = mistakes >of fact >and judgement, we ask everyone to please immediately disregard the = Coalition >of New >Jersey Sportsmen's call for a boycott against Colt's. Again, we are very = sorry >and >sincerely apologize for our actions. > >Very truly yours, >(Signed) >Richard Miller, Chairman > >*Mr. Zilkha as an individual, not Colt's, contributed to Mr. Schumer's >campaign. However, taken >in perspective, the amount contributed was small; Mr. Zilkha has a = multitude >of interests beyond >firearms; and he has contributed on a bipartisan basis, making contributio= n to >a number of >Republicans including House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Bob Dole and George = Bush.=20 > > >-------------------------- >GunsSaveLives Internet Discussion List > >This list is governed by an acceptable use >policy: http://www.wizard.net/~kc/policy.html >or available upon request. > >To unsubscribe send a message to >majordomo@listbox.com > >with the following line in the body: > >unsubscribe gsl > >GUNSSAVELIVES (GSL) IS A PRIVATE UNMODERATED LIST. >THE OWNER TAKES NO RESPONSIBILTY FOR CONTENT. ALL >RIGHTS RESERVED. > ****************** Firearms, self-defense, and other information, with LINKS are available at: http://shell.rmi.net/~davisda Latest additions are found in the group NEW with GOA and other alerts under the heading ALERTS. For those without browser capabilities, send [request index.txt] to davisda@rmi.net and an index of the files at this site will be e-mailed to you. Then send [request ] and the requested file will be sent as a message. Various shareware programs are archived at: ftp://shell.rmi.net/pub2/davisda To receive the contents of the FTP site, send [request index.ftp] to davisda@rmi.net ******************** For Help with Majordomo Commands, please send a message to: Majordomo@majordomo.pobox.com with the word Help in the body of the message - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: chardy@ES.COM (Charles Hardy) Subject: Re: [LPUtah Press Release] Date: 27 Aug 1998 13:37:18 -0600 Will, You're most welcome. However, either you protest too much, or you are simply playing devil's advocate here. :) Certainly with your past association with the LPUtah you are fully aware that we regard permits to carry weapons as infringments of basic rights. Anyone curious about the LPUtah's positions on this or other issues is invited to check out the web page at or to attend one of the many county or other meetings held on a regular basis. Re-read the press release carefully. It does not state any LPUtah support for permits or for the notion of a state "allowing" one to carry. It merely uses Utah's permit system as evidence that the majority of Utahn's believe it is **appropriate** (admittedly most do not yet fully understand the difference between a privledge and a right) to carry a gun for self defense. It also recognizes current realities and casts those realities in what I think is the best possible light in support of our position of expanding the statutory ability to exercise a constitutional right. Vermont is the only State in the Union to currently recognize the RIGHT to KBA. Utah's permit system is one of the less restrictive among the remaining 49 States. That fact indicates, in my mind, that Utahn's are friendly to RKBA even if they don't understand it fully. That is the point. It is deliberately worded so as to not express support where we do not wish to express it while still not coming off as so radical as to be automatically dismissed by too many people. Last time I heard, even you, yourself, had recognized the prudence of working within current confines of law. The State of Utah currently "allows" you to legally carry a concealed weapon. I would certainly not stoop so low as to suggest that your voluntary acquisition of a State issued CCW should be interpreted as support of any kind for restricting Constitutional rights by requiring permits. Please try to give the LPUtah the same consideration and benfit of the doubt in this area I try to give you. In Liberty Charles [for myself only] On Thu, 27 Aug 1998, Will Thompson posted: >Charles Hardy wrote: >> >> FYI, >> >> ----BEGIN FORWARDED MESSGE---- >> >> Libertarian Party of Utah >> Salt Lake City, Ut >> >[...snip...] >> >> "Rep. Hansen seems to be right in touch with the majority of Utah's >> electorate on this issue," said Libertarian Party state chair Jim >> Dexter. "Utahns have always rejected waiting periods as >> unconstitutional infringements of our most basic right to effective, >> armed defense. We also require the state to issue concealed weapons >> permits to any competent, law-abiding adult who can show basic >> proficiency with a firearm." >> >> The Libertarian Party called on Rep. Hansen to sponsor legislation to >> repeal the Brady law and to guarantee that a person legally allowed to >> carry a gun for self defense in any State could legally do so in the >> District of Columbia and federal territories. >> >[...snip...] >> >Thanks and Kudos to the LPU and Jim for making the statement! Welcome! > >But.... > >Is it really the position of the LPU that "our most basic right to >effective, armed defense." can be given or taken away by "the state" >which issues "concealed weapons permits to any competent, law-abiding >adult who can show basic proficiency with a firearm." and that the >state may "allow" ... "a person"..." to carry a gun for self defense"? > >Will > >- > > -- Charles C. Hardy | If my employer has an opinion on | these things I'm fairly certain 801.588.7200 (work) | I'm not the one he'd have express it. "A cardinal rule of bureaucracy is that it is better to extend an error than to admit a mistake." -- Colin Greenwood - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: chardy@ES.COM (Charles Hardy) Subject: Re: [LPUtah Press Release] Date: 27 Aug 1998 14:02:49 -0600 Will, Having re-read the press release a few times, I believe I see where your concern lies. If I were able to re-write this I would omit "a person legally allowed to carry a gun for self defense in any State" and replace it with simply "law-abiding citizens" or something similar. Clearly the federal government should respect constitutional rights regardless of whether or not State governments do. I aplogize that the wording of the release left any room to doubt on the LPUtah's position regarding the RKBA. Thank you for your input. I will try to be even more careful in press release wording in the future. In Liberty Charles. On Thu, 27 Aug 1998, Will Thompson posted: >Charles Hardy wrote: >> >> FYI, >> >> ----BEGIN FORWARDED MESSGE---- >> >> Libertarian Party of Utah >> Salt Lake City, Ut >> >[...snip...] >> >> "Rep. Hansen seems to be right in touch with the majority of Utah's >> electorate on this issue," said Libertarian Party state chair Jim >> Dexter. "Utahns have always rejected waiting periods as >> unconstitutional infringements of our most basic right to effective, >> armed defense. We also require the state to issue concealed weapons >> permits to any competent, law-abiding adult who can show basic >> proficiency with a firearm." >> >> The Libertarian Party called on Rep. Hansen to sponsor legislation to >> repeal the Brady law and to guarantee that a person legally allowed to >> carry a gun for self defense in any State could legally do so in the >> District of Columbia and federal territories. >> >[...snip...] >> >Thanks and Kudos to the LPU and Jim for making the statement! Welcome! > >But.... > >Is it really the position of the LPU that "our most basic right to >effective, armed defense." can be given or taken away by "the state" >which issues "concealed weapons permits to any competent, law-abiding >adult who can show basic proficiency with a firearm." and that the >state may "allow" ... "a person"..." to carry a gun for self defense"? > >Will > >- > > -- Charles C. Hardy | If my employer has an opinion on | these things I'm fairly certain 801.588.7200 (work) | I'm not the one he'd have express it. "The people of the various provinces are strictly forbidden to have in their possession any swords, bows, spears, firearms, or other types of arms. The possession of these elements makes difficult the collection of taxes and dues, and tends to permit uprising. Therefore, the heads of provinces, official agents, and deputies are ordered to collect all the weapons mentioned above and turn them over to the government." -- Toyotomi Hideyoshi, Shogun, August 29, 1558, Japan. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: Impeachment Blitz 2 Date: 28 Aug 1998 08:14:55 -0600 Received: from vader.thnet.com ([206.98.115.1]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Fri, 28 Aug 1998 04:47:15 -0600 Received: from bruce2.thnet.com (bruce2.thnet.com [206.98.115.102]) by vader.thnet.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA09922; Fri, 28 Aug 1998 05:40:54 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199808281040.FAA09922@vader.thnet.com> Comments: Authenticated sender is Organization: The Vigo Examiner Reply-to: Distribution@Vigo-Examiner.com Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.23) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline LETTER Impeachment Blitz 2 *** Time for PHONE FOLLOW UP of your impeachment post card BLITZ. *** You sent them post cards. Now give them a phone call to remind them about them. Ask them, politely, but firmly, "You did receive my post card, = didn't you?" "The post card that said Impeach Clinton." "It also said to post Starr's Report on the Internet." That will get them hustling. That will tell them you are serious. Please distribute this letter widely before sending your own cards. Please keep your groups organized so we can get this very necessary chore done. For more information, please read Heads Up #99. Simply click the headline at the top of page at my website at http://www.uhuh.com You can find your Congress Critters addresses at http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/ Let's each of us get 100 more people to send postcards. Let's really blitz Congress! This letter will be posted in Blitz Central at http://www.uhuh.com Click on Blitz. Yours in liberty, Forest http://www.Vigo-Examiner.com TEXT VERSION Enjoy a free 90 day trial subscription to The Vigo Examiner. You will receive one to three of our top articles each day. =20 Send your subscription request, and all other communication to Editor@Vigo-Examiner.com. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: (fwd) AB2560 passed (fwd) Date: 28 Aug 1998 09:26:31 -0600 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Fri, 28 Aug 1998 08:42:04 -0600 Received: from fs1.mainstream.net by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id IAA24955; Fri, 28 Aug 1998 08:30:32 -0600 Received: (from smap@localhost) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id KAA15080; Fri, 28 Aug 1998 10:40:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1) by fs1.mainstream.net via smap (V1.3) id sma014851; Fri Aug 28 10:37:36 1998 Message-Id: Errors-To: listproc@mainstream.com Reply-To: pwatson@utdallas.edu Originator: noban@mainstream.net Sender: noban@Mainstream.net Precedence: bulk X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware = tools. Send mail to mime@docserver.cac.washington.edu for more info. ---559023410-1804928587-904312567=3D:7195 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=3Dus-ascii Content-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Reply-To: texas-gun-owners@Mailing-List.net Our friends in California need our assistance. Call Gov. Wilson and urge him to veto AB2560. I don't know if Pete Wilson is still considering running for President, but we need to watch his actions on this. ---559023410-1804928587-904312567=3D:7195 Content-Type: MESSAGE/RFC822 Content-ID: Content-Description:=20 Received: by mailhost (mbox bubba) (with Cubic Circle's cucipop (v1.31 1998/05/13) Thu Aug 27 23:11:29 1998) X-From_: texasr2k@geocities.com Thu Aug 27 23:09:57 1998 X-Envelope-To: Return-Path: Received: from prefer.net (prefer.net [192.41.7.162]) by mailhost.cyberramp.net (8.9.1a/8.9.1/ler-980825-0832-PM) with = ESMTP id XAA04923 for ; Thu, 27 Aug 1998 23:09:56 -0500 (CDT) Received: from geocities.com (mail9.geocities.com [209.1.224.44]) by = prefer.net (8.8.5) id WAA00272; Thu, 27 Aug 1998 22:09:48 -0600 (MDT) Received: from dal-tsa16-6.cyberramp.net (dal-tsa16-6.cyberramp.net = [207.158.87.70]) by geocities.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id VAA03191 for ; Thu, 27 Aug 1998 21:09:40 -0700 = (PDT) Organization: * Message-ID: <35e92cd7.13591071@mail.geocities.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.5/32.452 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dus-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit By a vote of 41 yes, 31 no, 8 abstained AB2560 has passed and now goes to Governor Pete Wilson's desk for a = signature or veto. This law will unfairly burden law abiding owners of most magazine fed = firearms. Requiring us to submit to fingerprinting, registration and user fees on = items we legally purchased.=20 Contact Gov Wilson and ask him to VETO AB2560. I recommend you write an actual letter but followup with Email and phone calls. Everyone please get involved in this. You can contact Gov Pete Wilson at the following. Governor Pete Wilson State Capital Building Sacramento Ca 95814 916/445-2841 (phone) 916/445-4633 (fax) Pete.Wilson@ca.gov (Email) Remember, he is not running for reelection, so don't bother referring to = votes in your letters. We have to appeal to his sense of fairness and common = sense. We have to point out what a bureaucratic nightmare this bill will be to = lawful owners of these firearms. Everyone please join the fight against AB2560 = and please forward this info to other firearms list. ---559023410-1804928587-904312567=3D:7195-- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: Re: Polls, Polls, Polls Date: 31 Aug 1998 14:59:31 -0600 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Mon, 31 Aug 1998 10:29:16 -0600 Received: from fs1.mainstream.net by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id KAA27388; Mon, 31 Aug 1998 10:17:40 -0600 Received: (from smap@localhost) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id MAA16272; Mon, 31 Aug 1998 12:27:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1) by fs1.mainstream.net via smap (V1.3) id sma016013; Mon Aug 31 12:25:00 1998 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980831083110.009ba6a0@earthlink.net> Errors-To: listproc@mainstream.com Reply-To: freefighter@earthlink.net Originator: noban@mainstream.net Sender: noban@Mainstream.net Precedence: bulk X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Sharon, First of all, nice grill of the pollster. Kudos to you... IMHO, polls work on the same principles as the following sentence: Did you steal it? By changing the emphasis from word to word, the meaning of the sentence = can be changed. For example, the questions DID you steal it? (As in, "Someone says you did.") Did YOU steal it? (Going around the room and asking everyone.) Did you STEAL it? (Versus "Or did you buy it?") Did you steal IT? (as in "That, too?") are asking four different questions with four different answers. This is why I don't value polls, don't reference their data, and don't respond to political based polls... Most of them are a crock of sh*t and the entire intention is to give us a false confidence in the state of our government or a false belief in the "thinking (for lack of a better term) of the majority of the population. If you believe in the reults of polls, then according to most of them, those of us who support and believe in the 2nd Amendment are gun toting militia wackos... ..and my apologies if you really are one... :-) just a joke... At 09:34 AM 8/29/98 -0400, ZANE159@aol.com wrote: >Three years ago, I attended a "candidate development seminar". Our guest >speaker was a real live (and somewhat famous) Florida pollster. During = the >"Q&A" section of his talk, I raised my hand. > >Me: What do the telephone pollsters do when they get an answering = machine? > >Pollster: They are instructed to hang up and go on to the next number. = We >don't have time to leave messages, etc. > >Me: So polling data routinely excludes people who have enough disposable >income and enough education to buy, set up, and use a telephone answering >machine to screen their calls and take messages. Is that what you're = telling >me? > >Pollster: Well, no. We use a formula to extrapolate their responses. > >Me: A formula??? Sir, I'm a PhD candidate in physics and as such have a >passing=20 >familiarity with statistical methods. What, precisely, is this formula?? > >Pollster: I can't spend all my alloted time on one person. Next = questioner? > >Munch on this awhile. =20 > >Sharon Zane > > -