From: chardy@ES.COM (Charles Hardy) Subject: Local gun poll needs some help Date: 01 Dec 1998 12:51:21 -0700 All, There is a "quick poll" on the DesNew's front page today asking, "Should the legislature pass a law enabling adminstrators to ban guns in: Schools only Churches only Both Neither" Current vote totals are Schools only 116 (11%) churches only 10 (1%) both 709 (68%) neither 201 (19%) Please take a few moments to log in and register an opinion--espectially in the neither catagory. Let's make sure there isn't one more poll that can be used as justification for more laws limiting our RKBA. FWIW, every proposed bill last year and this year which purports to "allow" churches and/or schools to ban guns actually bans all (non governmental) guns from those locations (and usually include colleges and universities in their definition of schools) and requires the church or school, via some officer, to grant permission to carry on an individual basis. -- 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: chardy@ES.COM (Charles Hardy) Subject: [" Fun with statistics"] Date: 01 Dec 1998 12:51:52 -0700 ----BEGIN FORWARDED MESSGE---- "Top 10 List of Bread Statistics 1. More than 98 percent of convicted felons are bread users. 2. Fully HALF of all children who grow up in bread-consuming households score below average on standardized tests. 3. Bread is made from a substance called "dough." It has been proven that as little as one pound of dough can be used to suffocate a mouse. The average American eats more bread than that in one month! 4. Newborn babies can choke on bread. 5. Bread has been proven to be addictive. Subjects deprived of bread and given only water begged for bread after as little as two days. 6. Bread is often a "gateway" food item, leading the user to "harder" items such as butter, jelly, peanut butter, and even cold cuts. 7. In the 18th century, when virtually all bread was baked in the home, the average life expectancy was less than 50 years; infant mortality rates were unacceptably high; many women died in childbirth; and diseases such as typhoid, yellow fever, and influenza ravaged whole nations. 8. More than 90 percent of violent crimes are committed within 24 hours of eating bread. 9. Bread is baked at temperatures as high as 400 degrees Fahrenheit! That kind of heat can kill an adult in less than one minute. 10. Many bread eaters are utterly unable to distinguish between significant scientific fact and meaningless statistical babbling." ----END FORWARDED MESSAGE---- -- 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: John Lott on "Bogus Gun Lawsuits" (fwd) Date: 01 Dec 1998 16:00:10 -0700 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Tue, 01 Dec 1998 14:51:10 -0700 Received: from fs1.mainstream.net by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id OAA05682; Tue, 1 Dec 1998 14:38:09 -0700 Received: from (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with SMTP id QAA20190; Tue, 1 Dec 1998 16:49:44 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: Errors-To: listproc@mainstream.net Reply-To: pwatson@utdallas.edu Originator: noban@mainstream.net Sender: noban@mainstream.net Precedence: first-class 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 ---------- Reply-To: texas-gun-owners@Mailing-List.net Posted to texas-gun-owners by txjohn47@ix.netcom.com (John Johnson) ---- Begin Forwarded Article ---- Cities Target Gun Makers in Bogus Lawsuits More people are killed by cars; more children drown or die in fires. As Printed in the LA Times 12/1/98 By John R. Lott Jr., a fellow at the University of Chicago Law School. He is author of "More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws" (University of Chicago Press, 1998). Every product has illegitimate uses and undesirable consequences. In 1996 in the U.S., car accidents killed 43,000 people and injured another 3.4 million; 950 children under the age of 15 drowned in pools and while boating; 500 children died in bicycle accidents, and more than 1,000 children died from residential fires. No one is yet proposing that state or city governments should recoup medical costs or police salaries by suing automobile or bicycle companies, pool builders or makers of home heaters. Such suits make as little sense as pool builders suing the government to recoup the health benefits from exercise.=20 But suing manufacturers for any costs cities incur from gun injuries and deaths is exactly the theory behind the lawsuits by Chicago and New Orleans against gun makers. Gun control groups, which are helping organize the litigation, claim that as many as 60 cities will eventually sue. With so many simultaneous suits, the goal is not to win these weak cases in court but to bankrupt legitimate small companies through massive legal costs.=20 Obviously, bad things happen with guns. But the suits ignore that guns also prevent bad things by making it easier for victims to defend themselves. With fewer than 1% of all guns ever used in crimes or causing death or injury, many other products have much higher probabilities of causing harm. Unlike the tobacco suits, gun makers have powerful arguments about the benefits of gun ownership.=20 More than 450,000 crimes, including 10,744 murders, are committed with guns each year. But Americans also use guns defensively about 2.5 million times a year, and 98% of the time merely brandishing the weapon is sufficient to stop an attack.=20 Police are important in reducing crime rates, but they virtually always arrive after a crime has been committed. When criminals confront people, resistance with a gun is by far the safest course of action. Guns help offset the strength differential between male criminals and female victims. The chances of serious injury from an attack are 2.5 times greater for women offering no resistance than for those resisting with guns.=20 My own research has found that increased gun ownership rates are associated with lower crime rates. Poor people in the highest crime areas benefit the most from owning guns. Lawsuits against gun makers will raise the price of firearms, which will most severely reduce gun ownership among the law-abiding, much-victimized poor.=20 A 1996 survey by the National Assn. of Chiefs of Police found that 93% of 15,000 chiefs and sheriffs questioned thought that law-abiding citizens should be able to buy guns for self-defense. If mayors really believe that guns produce no benefits, there is one simple way they can demonstrate this: Disarm their bodyguards. It is hypocritical for mayors to demand that poor people live in high crime areas without being able to own guns, while the mayors would never enter these areas without armed guards.=20 Chicago claims that the gun makers made their weapons attractive to gang members through low price, easy concealability, corrosion resistance, accurate firing and high firepower. Lightweight, concealable guns may help criminals, but they also have helped protect law-abiding citizens and lower crime rates in the 43 states that allow concealed handguns. Women benefit most and also find it easier to use smaller, lightweight guns.=20 The New Orleans suit seeks to hold gun makers liable because accidental deaths are "foreseeable" and not enough was done to make guns safe. It is particularly concerned with accidental deaths involving children and cites three cases in New Orleans since 1992. Nationally, 30 children under 5 and 200 under 15 died from accidental gun deaths in 1996. Yet with 80 million people owning 200 million to 240 million guns, accidental deaths from guns are far less "foreseeable" than from many other products. Gun owners must be very responsible, or such gun accidents would be much more frequent.=20 Allowing the court system to ignore a product's benefits to society is bad enough. Yet even worse is the cynical attempt to file bogus lawsuits and use taxpayers' dollars to impose massive legal costs that render it infeasible for defendants to defend themselves. - - -=20 John R. Lott Jr., a Law and Economics Fellow at the University of Chicago School of Law, Is the Author of "More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws" (University of Chicago Press, 1998) -30- "After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it. I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in a society where the only people allowed guns are the police and the military." --William Burroughs "Gun Control: the political AIDS of a free society" --Ian Underwood, 13Sep98 "As Professor Lott discovered, gun ownership deters crime. But what will deter liberals? Certainly not the facts. They have too much invested in their vision of themselves as the saviors of us all." --Thomas Sowell, June 29, 1998 --=20 John Johnson TXJohn47@ix.netcom.com -- For help with Majordomo commands, send a message to majordomo@mailing-list.= net with the word help in the message body. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: FW: Shut the gun registration machine down!! Date: 01 Dec 1998 19:11:00 -0700 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- To All, Today, 11/30/98 is the first day of the new long gun registration scheme. We can shut it down by tying up their phone lines. Call *67 1-877-FBI-NICS or (*67 (877-324-6427) and ask for a press release for your community newspaper. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: Hypothetical incidents? Try real ... Date: 01 Dec 1998 19:11:00 -0700 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- It is "overwhelmingly clear" that disarming potential victims will not deter a criminal intent on harming others in a church, a school, or anyplace else. Those who claim that victim disarmament laws will protect us are either woefully ignorant or have ulterior motives. There exists an abundant number of instances of unarmed victims being killed, injured, or taken hostage by criminals who quite obviously care nothing about the law. (The Cody, Wyoming school incident comes immediately to mind.) Politicians who think they can change criminal human nature with a wave of their legislative hand are dangerous. The best deterrent to armed criminals is the knowledge that their victim/s may be armed. I recently lived in Maryland for a year and, as I wrote my Maryland state senator, I felt much safer in Utah where all my neighbors were armed. Richard L. (Dick) Partridge, 1998 Libertarian Candidate Utah State Senate District 24 4480 N. Hwy 38, Brigham City, Ut 84302 435-734-2678 On Sat, 28 Nov 1998 17:40:51 EST FreeUtah@aol.com writes: Limits on guns may pass in 1999 By Bob Bernick Jr. . The poll is on the right side of the page about 1/2 to 3/4 of the way down. I don't think it will let you vote more than once, but if you haven't voted yet, please do. Obviously, if the numbers stay in our favor, they'll never report them, but if any less than 51% of the total respondants vote for no restrictions, you can bet they'll spin it against us like "The majority of respondants favor restricting guns from schools or churches." Please make sure the numbers stay in our favor. It will be one less poll they can goad legislators with and I can pass along good numbers to a friendly legislator to diminish support for futher restrictions. -- 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: chardy@ES.COM (Charles Hardy) Subject: From today's DesNews' OpEd page Date: 02 Dec 1998 17:28:25 -0700 Wednesday, December 02, 1998 Comparing guns, cars is inaccurate By Mark Johnson Media General News Service WASHINGTON — In the national debate over firearms, supporters of tighter gun laws frequently draw the comparison between guns and cars. "Like cars, guns are dangerous," said Handgun Control Inc. officials in a 1994 proposal for a new gun law titled "Brady II." "Cars are not designed to kill and yet are heavily regulated: You must be of a minimum age, take a training course, pass a proficiency test, get a license, obtain insurance, and the car must be registered. And automobile manufacturers are subject to stringent safety regulations. "Guns carry none of these restrictions. In the interest of saving lives, Brady II would require gun owners and manufacturers to adopt safety measures similar to those required of car owners and manufacturers." At a conference of the American Society of Criminology in Washington this month, a college professor raised his hand and told a panel of experts he had never heard a good answer to the question of why guns are not regulated like cars, with registration and licensing. The contention here is that the government regulates cars more heavily than guns and that firearms, given their lethality, should be raised to at least the same level of restrictions. It's a point that is inaccurate and one that gun control supporters may find thrown right back at them. National Rifle Association members and other gun enthusiasts likely would be eager to embrace a plan that puts pistols and shotguns on the same regulatory plane as minivans and sport utility vehicles. Consider some of the effects: A customer with a felony conviction unrelated to firearms could still get a gun license, just as, for example, a conviction for bank robbery does not prohibit anyone from getting a driver's license. A 16-year-old could buy a gun in most states. Since car owners can drive any vehicle they want on their private property in any manner they wish (including while stone cold drunk with un-seat belted small children in the car), a gun owner could keep any type of firearm they wanted on their private property and handle it as recklessly as they like. A Virginia driver's license allows a driver to operate a car in any state. So a gun license would allow a firearms owner to take his Glock .9mm pistol on that trip to Florida. "Treating guns like cars would be massive gun decontrol," said Dave Kopel, an adjunct professor at New York University Law School who has written for NRA publications. "The day they start treating guns like cars, every Second Amendment supporter in this country is going to throw a party." The theory that what's good for cars is good for firearms falls apart when pushed beyond the sloganeering. Driving and owning a car is more loosely regulated and owning a gun is more strictly regulated than the comparison suggests. Handgun Control's Robin Terry said the "Brady II" proposal is not an argument for equal treatment among guns and cars but an effort to familiarize the public with the ideas of licensing and registration. Like so many disputes in the persistent national debate over guns, this one demonstrates that the simple approaches sound reasonable but turn out fairly complex. Mark Johnson covers the Justice Department and Supreme Court for Media General News Service. World & Nation + Utah + Sports + Business + Opinion + Front page -- 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. "Americans have the right and advantage of being armed - unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." -- James Madison, The Federalist Papers #46 at 243- 244 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: chardy@ES.COM (Charles Hardy) Subject: WW in DN--War Between the States Date: 02 Dec 1998 17:29:39 -0700 Wednesday, December 02, 1998 Civil War was about controls, not slavery By Walter Williams The problems that led to the Civil War are the same problems today — big, intrusive government. The reason we don't face the specter of another Civil War is because today's Americans don't have yesteryear's spirit of liberty and constitutional respect, and political statesmanship is in short supply. Actually, the war of 1861 was not a civil war. A civil war is a conflict between two or more factions trying to take over a government. In 1861, Confederate President Jefferson Davis was no more interested in taking over Washington than George Washington was interested in taking over England in 1776. Like Washington, Davis was seeking independence. Therefore, the war of 1861 should be called "The War Between the States" or the "War for Southern Independence." History books have misled today's Americans to believe the war was fought to free slaves. Statements from the time suggest otherwise. In President Lincoln's first inaugural address, he said, "I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so." During the war, in an 1862 letter to New York Daily Tribune editor Horace Greeley, Lincoln said, "My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and it is not either to save or destroy slavery." Lincoln's intentions, as well as that of many Northern politicians, were summarized by Stephen Douglas during the presidential debates. Douglas accused Lincoln of wanting to "impose on the nation a uniformity of local laws and institutions and a moral homogeneity dictated by the central government" that "place at defiance the intentions of the republic's founders." Douglas was right, and Lincoln's vision for our nation has now been accomplished beyond anything he could have possibly dreamed. A precursor for a War Between the States came in 1832, when South Carolina called a convention to nullify tariff acts of 1828 and 1832, referred to as the "Tariffs of Abominations." A compromise lowering the tariff was reached, averting secession and possibly war. The North favored protective tariffs for its manufacturing industry. The South, which exported agricultural products to and imported manufactured goods from Europe, favored free trade and was hurt by the tariffs. Plus, a Northern-dominated Congress enacted laws similar to Britain's Navigation Acts to protect Northern shipping interests. Shortly after Lincoln's election, Congress passed the highly protectionist Morrill tariffs. That's when the South seceded, setting up a new government. Its constitution was nearly identical to the U.S. Constitution except that it outlawed protectionist tariffs, business handouts and mandated a two-thirds majority vote for all spending measures. States should again challenge Washington's unconstitutional acts through nullification. But you tell me where we can find leaders with the love, courage and respect for our Constitution like Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and John C. Calhoun. Creators Syndicate Inc. World & Nation + Utah + Sports + Business + Opinion + Front page -- 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. "Americans have the right and advantage of being armed - unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." -- James Madison, The Federalist Papers #46 at 243- 244 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: LEGAL THEORY OF THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS 1/3 Date: 02 Dec 1998 23:31:00 -0700 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- L & J http://www.constitution.org/leglrkba.txt LEGAL THEORY OF THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS Copyright (c) 1994 Constitution Society. Permission is granted to copy with attribution for noncommercial purposes. There is considerable confusion about the legal theory underlying the "right to keep and bear arms". This is a brief outline for a clarification of the discussion of this issue. (1) The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution does not establish the right to keep and bear arms. None of the provisions of the Constitution establish any "natural" rights. They recognize such rights, but the repeal of such provisions would not end such rights. Such rights were considered by many of the Framers as obvious or "self-evident", but they were immersed in the prevailing republican thought of the day, as expressed in the writings of Locke, Montesquieu, Rousseau, Madison, Hamilton, and others, which discussed "natural rights" in some detail. Others argued that at least some of the rights needed to be made explicit in the Bill of Rights to avoid having future generations with less understanding of republican theory weaken in their defense of those rights. That has turned out to have been a good idea. (2) The right to keep and bear arms is a natural right of individuals under the theory of democratic government. This was clearly the understanding and intent of the Framers of the U.S. Constitution and was a long-established principle of English common law at the time the Constitution was adopted, which is considered to be a part of constitutional law for purposes of interpreting the written Constitution. (3) What the Second Amendment also does is recognize the right, power, and duty of able-bodied persons (originally males, but now females also) to organize into militias and defend the state. It effectively recognizes that all citizens have military and police powers, and the "able-bodied" ones -- the militia -- also have military and police duties, whether exercised in an organized manner or individually in a crisis. "Able-bodied" is a term of art established by English common law at the time the Constitution was adopted, and is the only qualification besides citizenship on what constitutes the "militia". While not well defined in modern terms, it is somewhat broader than just able-"bodied": implicit is also "able-minded" and "virtuous". In other words, persons might be excluded who were physically able to bear arms but who were mentally or morally defective. Defense of the "state" includes self-defense and defense of one's family and friends who are, after all, part of the state, but by establishing the defense of the state as primary a basis is laid for requiring a citizen to risk or sacrifice his life in defense of the state and is thus a qualification on the implicit right of self-defense, which is considered to prevail in situations in which self-sacrifice is not called for. (4) The U.S. Constitution does not adequately define "arms". When it was adopted, "arms" included muzzle-loaded muskets and pistols, swords, knives, bows with arrows, and spears. However, a common-law definition would be "light infantry weapons which can be carried and used, together with ammunition, by a single militiaman, functionally equivalent to those commonly used by infantrymen in land warfare." That certainly includes modern rifles and handguns, full-auto machine guns and shotguns, grenade and grenade launchers, flares, smoke, tear gas, incendiary rounds, and anti-tank weapons, but not heavy artillery, rockets, or bombs, or lethal chemical, biological or nuclear weapons. Somewhere in between we need to draw the line. The standard has to be that "arms" includes weapons which would enable citizens to effectively resist government tyranny, but the precise line will be drawn politically rather than constitutionally. The rule should be that "arms" includes all light infantry weapons that do not cause mass destruction. If we follow the rule that personal rights should be interpreted broadly and governmental powers narrowly, which was the intention of the Framers, instead of the reverse, then "arms" must be interpreted broadly. (5) The right to keep and bear arms does indeed extend to the states. As do the other rights recognized by other Amendments, and as reinforced by the Fourteenth Amendment. It is not just a restriction on the powers of the central government. On the other hand, the citizens of a state can adopt a constitution that might restrict the exercise of such rights by delegating the power to do so to the state government. However, if the restriction of natural rights is unduly burdensome on those rights, then such a provision would be incompatible with the U.S. Constitution, its guarantee of the rights, and its guarantee that all states have a "republican" form of government - which such restrictions would compromise. (6) The legal basis for a government not infringing on the right to keep and bear arms is not constitutional provisions like the Second Amendment, but that the power to do so is not one of the enumerated powers delegated to the government, whether Union or State. That delegation must be explicit as pertains to arms. They can't be regulated on the basis of general powers to tax or to regulate commerce. Arms have a special status under constitutional law. Some State constitutions may delegate such powers to the State government. The U.S. Constitution does not delegate such powers to the Union government. No powers are delegated to government by the preamble to a constitution, which is only a statement of purpose, only by provisions in the body of the document and its amendments. (7) The legal basis on which the states can regulate arms is in those situations in which they conflict with property rights. It is a fundamental principal in law that the owners or managers of real property have the power to regulate who may enter their premises, and to set conditions upon their entry. That includes public property. Citizens have a right to keep and bear arms -- on their own property or property they control -- but not on someone else's property without his permission. [ Continued In Next Message... ] - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: LEGAL THEORY OF THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS 2/3 Date: 02 Dec 1998 23:31:00 -0700 [ ...Continued From Previous Message ] (8) In other words, citizens have a right to keep and bear arms in those places and situations where they have a right to be, unless such rights are disabled by due process of law. Fundamental natural rights can never be lost, as contractual rights can be, only the exercise of those rights restricted or "disabled", to use the legal term. The distinction is very important. Natural rights are those which the individual brings with him when he enters into the social contract, and reclaims if the social contract is broken. The right to keep and bear arms is such a natural right, as is the right of free speech, religious belief, and privacy. The alternative is a contractual right created by a contract, such as the social contract. The right to vote or to be judged by a jury of one's peers are examples of rights created by the social contract, albeit important ones that are also constitutionally protected. Because they are constitutionally protected, it is only proper to speak of them as disabled, rather than lost, so long as the subject remains a citizen or natural person, depending on whether it is a right of citizenship or personhood. (9) It is unconstitutional to "disable" any rights by statute except one set: the rights of majority. The disabilities of minority do not need to be established by a court trial or hearing. However, they can be removed sooner than they would be removed by constitution or statute, by reaching a certain age. This means it is unconstitutional to disable the right to keep and bear arms to a class of persons by statute, including those, such as felons, who have been the subject of due process on another issue, except through a proceeding in which the court is explicitly petitioned to disable them, the subject has an opportunity to argue to the contrary, the petitioner has the burden of proof that the subject if armed would be a threat to himself or others, and the court grants that petition. Merely being convicted of a crime, or declared mentally incompetent, is not sufficient if the language of the judgment does not also explicitly disable the right to keep and bear arms, or set restrictions on such right. (10) "General police powers" is not a constitutional basis for states or localities to regulate arms. "General police powers" are the powers to use the means necessary and sufficient to stop someone who threatens to commit a major crime, or to arrest someone who has done so. All citizens have such power. They differ from regular, professional police only in that the regular police also have "special police powers" in matters such as minor offenses, and in that they outrank civilians. Since citizens have general police powers, they also have the right to such means as they require to exercise such powers in situations in which they may be called upon to do so. That includes arms. (11) To be constitutional, state laws restricting the bearing of arms must distinguish between public property, private commercial property which serves the public and which therefore confers certain rights to the public, and other private property with no public access rights. It is reasonable and constitutional to prohibit persons from bearing arms onto purely private property without notifying the owner or manager and obtaining his or her permission, except over public easements, such as sidewalks or the walkway from the street to the front door. On the other hand, it would be an undue burden on the right to bear arms to forbid persons from traveling between places where they have a right to be, and to bear arms while they do so, along public pathways or private easements, and using their own or a public means of transportation. It may not, however, be an undue burden to prohibit the bearing of arms onto certain public property where persons do not have unrestricted access, such as office buildings and auditoriums, provided that authorities guarantee the safety of persons who enter unarmed. Owners of commercial property serving the public which confers some rights of access to the public may prohibit the bearing of arms by posting or giving a notice to that effect, but lacking such notice, bearing arms onto the premises would be permitted. The rule must be that laws must not burden the right to bear arms except to the extent that they would impose a greater burden on the right of property owners to exclude persons bearing arms. (12) The law must presume that places of business that cater to arms, such as gun shops and shooting ranges, and events such as gun shows, offer presumptive permission to bear arms and that therefore it is not illegal to bear them there or to travel to and from them. (13) A carry permit system essentially is a removal of restrictions against bearing arms on public and private property unless there is an express prohibition against doing so, either in the form of a posted sign or a directive from the owner or his agent. The rationale for issuing such permits is to equip persons of good character to more effectively function as militiamen or police in situations in which regular police are not available or insufficient. That also includes self-protection, but the key factor is the duty to perform police duties as necessary. There also needs to be explicit statutory protection of the state or other permit issuing authority against criminal or civil liability for any acts done by the permit holder. One kind of carry permit is that which is one of the "special police powers" of regular law-enforcement officers, which allows them to carry anywhere, even against the express wishes of a property owner. (14) With the high levels of crime we now endure, the only effective way to extend police protection to a level that might deter crime is to recruit a substantial proportion of the public to go armed, by issuing them carry permits, offering them police training, and organizing them into a network of militia units closely coordinated with regular law enforcement agencies. It is likely that as many as 25% of the adult public could serve in this way on a regular basis, and another 25% on an occasional basis, and that if they did, we might expect it to have a significant positive impact on crime. Some such citizens might even be granted higher police rank, and perform regular police duties on a part-time basis. Such involvement of the public in law enforcement would also have other benefits: breaking down the social and psychological barriers that now separate the regular police from civilians, and deterring some of the abuses of authority that police have sometimes fallen into. [ Continued In Next Message... ] - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: LEGAL THEORY OF THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS 2/3 Date: 02 Dec 1998 23:31:00 -0700 [ ...Continued From Previous Message ] (15) That the militia should be "well-regulated" is not a basis for restricting the keeping or bearing of arms. The term originally meant "self-regulated" and militias could be independent of state or national authority if not called up by such authority. Militia members may be required to carry certain standard arms during formations, but they cannot be forbidden from carrying additional arms of their own unless doing so would impair normal militia operations. State-appointed officers may direct when, where and in what manner members of the militia are to train and perform their duties, but may not forbid them to meet on their own. (16) The Union government has the power, under the U.S. Constitution, to regulate imports and interstate commerce in arms, but the Framers would not agree with how the "interstate commerce" clause (Art. 1, Sec. 8) of the Constitution has been broadly interpreted to include regulation of manufacture, possession, and local sales and use of items. A strict constitutional interpretation requires that the Union government has authority only over transactions that cross state lines, and not over actions or transactions that occur within state borders, even if they involve items that may someday cross state borders or may have once done so. If we want the Union government to have such authority, and a good case can be made for that, then the U.S. Constitution needs to be amended to delegate that authority to it. (17) The Union government also has excise taxing power, but since arms have special status under the Constitution, no tax may be levied that imposes an undue burden on the right to keep and bear arms. Rights are more fundamental than taxing powers, particularly since the right to keep and bear arms is recognized in an amendment which supersedes any prior provisions that conflict with it, which includes all taxing powers except the income tax (which does not provide a basis for taxing arms). Arms may be taxed as general merchandise is, such as with a sales tax, but any tax law which specifies arms for special taxes, other than reasonable use fees for public services related to them, must be considered unconstitutional. That would include taxes on ammunition and the ingredients to make it. The analogy is to taxes on newsprint, which may be taxed like other merchandise, but not in a way that would impose an undue burden on the right of a free press. (18) This means that no government has the power, unless that power is specifically granted to it under its constitution, to prohibit any person from manufacturing or possessing any gun or ammunition for it on his own premises or where he has a right to be, or against using it in a safe and responsible manner, or against selling or giving it to another person within the borders of a state. (19) Since the common law prevailing at the time the Constitution was adopted defined "militia" to consist of "able-bodied" citizens, including persons younger than the usual age of majority, any law restricting the possession, sale or gift of guns or ammunition to persons under the age of majority or any other particular age, or to minors (since persons under the age of majority may have their disabilities of minority removed by a court), is also unconstitutional, unless the constitution explicitly includes a disability of the right to keep and bear arms among the disabilities of minority. The proper test for being "able-bodied" must involve meeting certain standards that are independent of age, such as skill, judgement, and level of maturity. It is possible for persons to be "able-bodied" at quite a young age, and the law must recognize that competence where it exists. All citizens above the age of majority would have to be presumed able-bodied unless they or the state petitioned a court to rule otherwise and it granted the petition. However, it would be constitutional to require a reasonable test of competence to citizens below the age of majority, and to issue credentials to those qualifying which they would be required to show when answering calls of the militia or, if the right to keep and bear arms were included among the rights disabled by minority, when bearing arms. Early removal of the disabilities of minority would then also remove the disabilities of the right to keep and bear arms. (20) The "full faith and credit" clause of the U.S. Constitution requires that persons issued a carry permit by one state must have that permit recognized in other states. This suggests a uniform standard for qualifying persons for issuance. REFERENCE: Stephen P. Halbrook, That Every Man be Armed, available from The Independent Institute, 134 98th Av, Oakland, CA 94603, 510/568-6047. Constitution Society, 6900 San Pedro #147-230, San Antonio, TX 78216, 210/224-2868 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: chardy@ES.COM (Charles Hardy) Subject: Gun poll in DesNews Update Date: 03 Dec 1998 11:06:23 -0700 The "Quick Poll" in the DesNews has now been changed. The results from the previous poll are not available like they used to be. The last time I was able to check, the numbers were slightly in favor on not banning guns in either schools or churchers. I placed a call to Mark Reece, the Web edition Associate editor at 801-237-2156 to ask how to see the final results. His voice mail asked for a message and gave the name of Stewart (missed the last name) at 801-236-6097. I called Stewart and asked about how to see the results. Seems they are currently debating over whether or not to make the results of past polls available. He is personally in favor of doing so and said my call requesting it would help him support his point of view that they should be available. Without disclosing my own feelings, I casually asked if he knew how the poll had turned out. He said it had started with most people wanting to ban guns in both places, but had then shifted dramatically and he thought perhaps someone had gotten organized (who would do that?) :) and maybe even figured out how to vote multiple times. He indicated he'd try to get the results up on the web page and then I could judge the validity of the numbers for myself (a truely novel concept in today's media IMO). He was very friendly. It might not be a bad idea to make a call to Mark and/or Stewart, asking how to see the results. If you don't all let on your personal feelings, it may not even appear to be an "organized" effort by us. :) I'd love to see these results reported in both the web and paper additions, but doubt they'd do that. I wonder if they've every considered or worried about multiple votes on any other polls they've taken or if they'd have worried about it on this one had the numbers gone the other way. I also wonder if there would be any question about making past polls' results available if the numbers had gone as they wanted. Assuming the numbers did influence anyone in not wanting to put previous polls' results on the web, Stewart's expressed desire to make them available would speak well of his intergity vs anyone who is lobbying otherwise in an effort to surpress. One lesson here is to try to get info on these types of polls out as quickly as possible and to then take a moment to vote as soon as possible, BEFORE the numbers skew too far against us and anyone can claim it was an "organized effort" (like "random" phone polls with loaded questions made during the day when most people are at work yield trustworthy results) that resulted in a sudden turn around. Regardless, they can now try to minimize the validity of their online poll, (admittedly unscientific) but at least they can't include in their reporting that the majority of on-line readers (more affluent?, better educated?) favor banning guns. Perhaps a few letters to the editor citing the results once they are available would be in order. While such polls are not scientific or random, one could make the case that those who are educated enough to use the internet and care enough about the issue to log an opinion, really don't want to see guns banned or something similar. Thanks to everyone who voted. Let us know if you have any contact with the DesNews on this issue and how it goes. -- 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. "That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent *the people* of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms ..." -- Samuel Adams in arguing for a Bill of Rights, from the book "Massachusetts," published by Pierce & Hale, Boston, 1850, pg. 86-87. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: chardy@ES.COM (Charles Hardy) Subject: [jimdex@inconnect.com: LPU: LP RELEASE: Instant Check] Date: 03 Dec 1998 11:07:55 -0700 From the LPUtah. ----BEGIN FORWARDED MESSGE---- Abolish the instant check gun system before innocent Americans are killed > > WASHINGTON, DC -- The government's so-called "instant background >checks" for gun buyers should be abolished immediately before any innocent >Americans are robbed, raped, or murdered while waiting to buy a firearm, the >Libertarian Party said today. > > The party's demand follows an admission by the FBI that because of >telephone and computer glitches, 34% of all gun buyers -- or 1,688 people on >Monday alone -- were unable to buy a gun. > > Meanwhile, just one-quarter of one percent of would-be gun-buyers were >rejected because of a criminal record -- meaning that 135 law-abiding citizens >were denied a gun for every criminal rejected during the first day of the new >program. > > "How many Americans have just been sentenced to death by bureaucracy >as a result of the government's failed instant check system?" asked Steve >Dasbach, national chairman of the Libertarian Party. > > "If even one American is harmed while waiting for government approval >to defend themselves, it's one too many -- which is why these background >checks should be abolished immediately." > > The national "instant check" system, which replaces the five-day >waiting period mandated by the 1994 Brady Bill, requires each of the nation's >105,000 gun dealers to call the FBI to run an instant criminal background >check on anyone trying to buy a handgun, rifle, or shotgun. > > "The problem is that criminals are the only Americans who benefit from >such background checks, because they don't take them," Dasbach said. "Real >criminals have no problem getting guns. In fact, a recent Justice Department >survey of convicted criminals found that 93% had acquired their guns >illegally. > > "But by forcing law-abiding citizens to wait for days and weeks to buy >a firearm, the government has painted a target on their backs." > > Forcing Americans to undergo background checks is not only unsafe -- >it's un-American and unconstitutional, too, Dasbach said. > > "An instant check of the Constitution reminds us that the government >doesn't have the authority to restrict gun ownership -- period. It's >outrageous for politicians to require a background check as a condition of >exercising any Constitutional right," he said. > > "The government has no more right to demand that you submit to a >background check before exercising your Second Amendment right to buy a gun >than it does to require a background check before exercising your First >Amendment right to publish a newspaper or go to church." > > However, Dasbach acknowledged one practical difference between the >First and Second Amendment rights in this case: "No lives are immediately >jeopardized by failure to publish a newspaper, but innumerable lives have been >put in danger this week by the government's refusal to allow Americans to buy >a gun to defend themselves." > > And if you run an "instant check" on the behavior of Congress, you'll >see that it can't be trusted when it meddles with the Constitution -- or our >safety, said Dasbach. > > "If you supported the Brady Bill, you trusted the politicians when >they said this law would just keep guns out of the hands of criminals. >Instead, innocent Americans have been unfairly denied a fundamental right -- >the right to protect themselves and their families. > > "In other words, Americans have once again had their liberty >sacrificed for the promise of safety. Unfortunately, the failure of the >instant-check system guarantees that many Americans will have neither." > > # # # LPUtah LPUtah -- This message sent via listserver "lputah@qsicorp.com" LPUtah -- All messages are the sole responsibility of the sender. LPUtah -- Support: Jim Elwell, email: elwell@inconnect.com LPUtah ----END FORWARDED MESSAGE---- -- 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. "That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent *the people* of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms ..." -- Samuel Adams in arguing for a Bill of Rights, from the book "Massachusetts," published by Pierce & Hale, Boston, 1850, pg. 86-87. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: *Impeachment Vote Will Be Closer Than Predicted Date: 04 Dec 1998 08:17:54 -0700 > RKBA Defenders >=20 > It's time to call Washington!=20 >=20 >=20 > Two topics: >=20 > 1) Don't let Clinton get away with treason. >=20 > 2) Don't put up with Brady II - Repeal it! >=20 >=20 > PLEASE - YOUR INPUT IS NEEDED RIGHT AWAY - timing is crucial >=20 >=20 > 1) NY Times: Impeachment May Pass [or FAIL] Full House by a Narrow > Margin >=20 > "By day's end, Republicans said there were up to 12 Republican votes > against impeachment and another small core group of moderates still > unwilling to commit. Democratic leaders say they believe that only 3 to > 5 > of their members will turn against Clinton. If the Republicans lose only > 12 votes, and if several Democrats break ranks, impeachment could pass > by > a narrow margin." http://www.drudgereport.com/matt.htm=20 >=20 > We could also *lose* by a very narrow margin, and then the Clinton- > Reno-ATF-Brady axis would push their gun registration / confiscation > operation into full gear.=20 >=20 > As we have all seen and been frustrated to no end: squishy Republicans > shake in their boots, and fail time and again to face down wrong, but > determined, Democrats. >=20 > We are close to exposing their corruption through an inquiry into > campaign finance crimes (selling votes for Chinese Communist money).=20 > The Dems have gone into high scream level because they know how > vulnerable they are. =20 >=20 > The votes are being tallied on next weeks' decision to impeach or not to > impeach and the crucial swing voters are teetering on the edge of > betraying us, the Constitution and the Second Amendment. A vote for > impeachment prevents a Gore presidential pardon, which means mouths > closed in anticipation of pardon may suddenly start to speak. >=20 > Please take a moment out of your busy life and contact Congress. >=20 > 1) In person is best > 2) then letters or faxes > 3) then telephone calls > 4) e-mails are better than nothing > 5) If don't do anything? You can't complain. >=20 > Contacting Congress=20 > http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/ - has Fax numbers! Best! If not, > then at least call. >=20 > THE ELECTRONIC ACTIVIST An email address directory of congress, state > governments, and media entities. > http://www.berkshire.net/~ifas/activist/=20 >=20 > Mr. Smith E-Mails Washington(sm): Mr. Smith E-Mails The Media(sm)=20 > http://www.mrsmith.com/=20 >=20 > To do it cheap, but takes time... > 1(800)361-5222 (ext. 90001) for any Representative or via the links: > ------------------------------------------------------------------- >=20 >=20 > 2) REPEAL BRADY - DON'T RELY ON OTHERS TO DO ALL THE DIRTY WORK >=20 > PLEASE TAKE ACTION >=20 > ..and once you have contacted your CongressCritters and demanded that > Clinton be impeached, swing by and send an e-mail to every member of > Congress who has not yet signed on the legislation repealing the Brady > Bill GunOwners of America at: >=20 > http://www.gunowners.org/mailerx.html=20 >=20 > This handy device is all configured to auto-mail all the footdraggers.=20= > You only need to fill in a couple of boxes and this great device does > the rest of the work. >=20 > Thank you for your time, attention, and patience. >=20 > It's freedom you are leaving to your grandkids. >=20 >=20 > In Liberty, >=20 > Rick V. >=20 >=20 > --=20 > The Right to Self Defense is a Fundamental Human Right - RKBA >=20 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: Jan. 1999 Hot Rod Magazine Date: 07 Dec 1998 14:31:49 -0700 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Mon, 07 Dec 1998 14:19:37 -0700 Received: from kendaco.telebyte.com by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id OAA12160; Mon, 7 Dec 1998 14:06:28 -0700 Received: (from mail@localhost) by kendaco.telebyte.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id NAA25723; Mon, 7 Dec 1998 13:13:52 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: kendaco.telebyte.com: mail set sender to NRA-ILA-EVC-owner@kendaco.telebyte.com using -f Received: from x15.boston.juno.com (x15.boston.juno.com [205.231.100.28]) by kendaco.telebyte.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25719 for ; Mon, 7 Dec 1998 13:13:49 -0800 Received: (from rc_hayes1@juno.com) by x15.boston.juno.com (queuemail) id DVV5QYK3; Mon, 07 Dec 1998 16:10:37 EST Message-ID: <19981207.150808.-184629.4.RC_Hayes1@juno.com> Reply-To: NRA-ILA-EVC@kendaco.telebyte.com Sender: NRA-ILA-EVC-owner@kendaco.telebyte.com Precedence: list Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Below is a letter that I am sending to Hot Rod Magazine regarding a letter on page 10. "My wife is an elementary-school librarian and a car girl. She is also smart enough to realize that it's safer for her and her pubescent, hormonally charged youngsters to ogle the cars and (sometimes) cleavage in Hot Rod than for them to be getting ideas from say, Guns & Ammo! Duh! Ignorance like that burns me up. This is a prime example of why we need to get our message out to the uninformed public. HCI loves people like this. Royce Hayes 4th Tx. HOT ROD 6420 Wilshire Blvd. Los Angeles, CA 90048-5515 Gentlemen: =20 I resent the slur and the "Duh" remark by Mr. Steve Kirkpatrick, Clio, AL, regarding the merits of semi-nudity versus "Guns & Ammo". I have enjoyed "Hot Rod" many years, following one of my favorite=20 pastimes. My other favorite pastime is shooting and reloading. I have subscribed to "Guns & Ammo" for many years. They also sponsor my favorite radio program "Gun Talk". I find nothing derogatory between the pages of "Guns & Ammo", and certainly nothing that would make me ashamed to let the smallest children look at or read. =20 We defenders of 2nd amendment rights are not a bunch of loose cannons.=20 We love our country. I have served in the military to defend Mr. Kirkpatrick's right to read whichever magazine he chooses. Please do not put me down or take away my rights because you are uninformed as to what is between the pages of my magazine. I believe in being responsible and trained with cars or with firearms.=20 Either one can be lethal in the hands of the wrong person. Should I say that you should never teach a child about a car? I think not. The same goes with firearms. Proper training is the key. Children must learn to the respect the inherent dangers of both. =20 Sincerely, ___________________ Royce C. Hayes 10433 CR 1292 Flint, Texas 75762 E-mail: RC_Hayes1@juno.com ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] ****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: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: Clinton and gun shows Date: 07 Dec 1998 14:32:19 -0700 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Mon, 30 Nov 1998 10:28:52 -0700 Received: from kendaco.telebyte.com by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id KAA04125; Mon, 30 Nov 1998 10:15:51 -0700 Received: (from mail@localhost) by kendaco.telebyte.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id JAA06041; Mon, 30 Nov 1998 09:20:45 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: kendaco.telebyte.com: mail set sender to NRA-ILA-EVC-owner@kendaco.telebyte.com using -f Received: from arl-img-6.compuserve.com (arl-img-6.compuserve.com [149.174.217.136]) by kendaco.telebyte.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA06037 for ; Mon, 30 Nov 1998 09:20:44 -0800 Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by arl-img-6.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.16) id MAA07329; Mon, 30 Nov 1998 12:20:21 -0500 (EST) "INTERNET:CWRHOADES@aol.com" , "INTERNET:NRA-ILA-EVC@kendaco.telebyte.com" , Warren B Jones Message-ID: <199811301220_MC2-61F5-DDB@compuserve.com> Reply-To: NRA-ILA-EVC@kendaco.telebyte.com Sender: NRA-ILA-EVC-owner@kendaco.telebyte.com Precedence: list Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline The following alert was forwarded to me from another list. As you are = well aware, the Clinton Administration wants to strangle gun shows using the federal agencies.=20 BATF is seeking public comment on gun shows. Please take a moment to = write a well-thought, concerned letter to the BATF. The address and other information is listed below. David Adams NRA-ILA-EVC, VA 7th http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/8358/ wingedmonkey@compuserve.com ___________________________________________________________________________= _________ The Clinton-Gore administration has set its sights on gun shows, and they will use every means at their disposal to eliminate the rights of gun owners in America. The BATF has recently issued an open letter requesting comments from "interested parties concerning gun shows." It reads as follows: "On November 7, 1998, the President expressed his concern about the = numbers of firearms sold at gun shows and elsewhere without Brady background = checks being conducted or the ability to trace the firearms being sold...The President has asked that the secretary and the Attorney General provide = him with recommendations by January 6, 1999. "The BATF would like your comments and suggestions concerning this matter. For your input to be considered please include your name and address. We request that your reply be returned to this office by December 7, 1998. We appreciate your time and input. Please mail comments to: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms Attn: Gun Shows ' 650 Massachusetts Ave. NW, Suite 7400 Washington, DC, 20226" Of course, BATF's expansion of the President's statements to include regulating gun sales "elsewhere" raises more questions about the ultimate goals of the Administration. Time is short, so please be sure to submit your comments as soon as possible if you would like to have them considered= by the December 7 deadline. If you would like more information on how protect your Second Amendment Rights, please contact the NRA member = Council of King County, WAshington, at (206) 764-0778, or come to one of our meetings, The second Friday of every month, 7:00PM at Weapons Safety = Indoor Range in Bellevue, 13215 SE 30th St., Bellevue. Please forward this message to any interested parties- Ken Houghton ****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: "David Sagers" Subject: [Fwd: For your amusement: "Pistol Envy"] Date: 10 Dec 1998 08:44:32 -0700 Go to the referenced site and read the story, it is hilarious See: http://www.realmensch.com/articles2/pistol.html=20 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: chardy@ES.COM (Charles Hardy) Subject: Smart Card Licenses one step at a time Date: 10 Dec 1998 14:21:59 -0700 We managed to keep them from doing smart cards two years ago, so they'll just give it to us one piece at a time now--starting with bar codes and digitized pictures. All in the name of security, stopping forgers, and such, of course. And of course, they have no plans to add anything else *at this time*. Just like SS numbers would *never* be used for ID purposes. Once anything is digitized, it can be copied any number of times onto any number of systems quickly and perfectly. Any ideas on how to stop this. From today's Trib: Thursday, December 10, 1998 New Utah Licenses Will Thwart Counterfeiters BY LISA CARRICABURU THE SALT LAKE TRIBUNE Utah's Driver License Division is about to merge onto the Information Superhighway. The agency has awarded Polaroid Corp. a five-year, $4.5 million contract for a new digital-imaging and database system that by next fall will begin producing driver licenses with built-in security features designed to prevent duplication and fraud. ``Our existing system is so antiquated, documents can easily be reproduced with commercially available software and equipment,'' said Bart Blackstock, Driver Services Bureau chief. The new system, in contrast, will have safeguards guaranteed to drive counterfeiters crazy. Their crimes and those committed by forgers last year led to nearly 1,200 arrests, according to Crime in Utah 1997, published by the Utah Department of Public Safety. Once the system is in place in November 1999, drivers and state ID card holders will convert to the new documents on their renewal dates. For that reason, it may take up to five years to build the computer database with digital photographs of all Utah's licensed drivers and ID card holders. Once that database is in place, however, it also will serve as a valuable law-enforcement tool, Blackstock said. Police officers, for example, will be able to quickly access the database from laptop computers in their patrol cars, he said. ``They have access to similar information now; it just takes longer.'' The 500,000 driver licenses, learner permits and identification cards Utah awards each year to the state's 1.3 million motorists and other residents will originate at special computer workstations Polaroid will install in Utah's 25 driver license offices, said Kent Sharp, Polaroid program manager. Pictures captured by digital cameras will be stored as computer files. They will be sent to a central location where all documents will be produced, he said. The new licenses will resemble credit cards. A plastic laminate will be impossible to remove without damaging the document, unlike existing documents, which can be peeled apart fairly easily, Blackstock said. In addition, each license issued will have a bar code programmed with some of the information printed on the document, such as the holder's name, address and license number, he said. Even if counterfeiters are able to alter documents' outward appearances, they will be unable to change the information encrypted on the bar code. And because all documents will be produced at a single location, it will be easier to control materials used to make them, preventing thefts that lead to duplication or production of fraudulent documents. ``The process overall will be much more secure,'' Blackstock said. He stressed the new licenses will not be ``smart cards,'' as once discussed by lawmakers. While it will be possible one day to add microchips to the cards capable of storing bank account numbers and other information, ``We have no plans whatsoever to add such capabilities now.'' Legislators two years ago scrapped plans to add smart-card capabilities to Utah driver licenses after some residents complained, saying they feared the feature may give government access to personal information. For Utah drivers, the new system means they will not receive their licenses the same day their photographs are taken. Instead, they will receive temporary permits they may use for the five to seven days it takes for licenses to be made at the central facility and mailed out. The change also means driver license renewal fees may increase, Blackstock said. Each new license will cost the state about $2.75 to make, as opposed to the $1 cost for existing licenses. The Driver License Division in January will ask the Legislature for permission to slightly raise the driver-license renewal fee, which currently is $10, he said. Utah is one of several states converting to digital driver license systems, Sharp said. Polaroid already has installed systems in Colorado, Georgia, Iowa, Missouri, Oregon, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia and West Virginia. © Copyright 1998, The Salt Lake Tribune All material found on Utah OnLine is copyrighted The Salt Lake Tribune and associated news services. No material may be reproduced or reused without explicit permission from The Salt Lake Tribune. Contact The Salt Lake Tribune or Utah OnLine by clicking here. -- 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. "If there is one basic element in our Constitution, it is civilian control of the military." -- President Harry S. Truman (1884-1972) - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: Fw: Pol-Now the UN is after ammo as well Date: 11 Dec 1998 09:53:04 -0700 Received: from kendaco.telebyte.com ([206.53.160.3]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Fri, 11 Dec 1998 07:36:14 -0700 Received: (from mail@localhost) by kendaco.telebyte.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id GAA11476; Fri, 11 Dec 1998 06:33:46 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: kendaco.telebyte.com: mail set sender to NRA-ILA-EVC-owner@kendaco.telebyte.com using -f Received: from mail1.javanet.com (mail1.javanet.com [205.219.162.10]) by kendaco.telebyte.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA11472 for ; Fri, 11 Dec 1998 06:33:45 -0800 Received: from eadsent (ct-hartford-hiper1295.javanet.com [209.150.38.93]) by mail1.javanet.com (8.8.8/8.7) with SMTP id JAA21199; Fri, 11 Dec 1998 09:31:50 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <008401be2513$426d7ab0$492596d1@eadsent.NAI.NET> "Ralph Sherman" , "Joel Partridge" , "Paul Payne" , "ILA EVC NRA" , "Scott Hoffman" , "Fairfield Cty Second Amend" , "Robert Crook" Reply-To: NRA-ILA-EVC@kendaco.telebyte.com Sender: NRA-ILA-EVC-owner@kendaco.telebyte.com Precedence: list Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline -----Original Message----- BACKGROUND INFORMATION STUDY GROUP ON AMMUNITION AND EXPLOSIVES IN ALL THEIR ASPECTS Deriving from a recommendation of the Report of the Secretary-General on Small Arms submitted in pursuance of General Assembly resolution 50/70 B (A/52/298), the Study Group on Ammunition and Explosives in all their aspects has been established in pursuance of operative paragraph 3 of General Assembly resolution 52/38 J on "Small Arms". This paragraph asks the Secretary-General to "initiate a study on the problems of ammunition and explosives in all their aspects, as early as possible, within available financial resources, and = in cooperation with appropriate international and regional organizations = where necessary". The first working session of the Study Group took place from 27 April to 1 May 1998 at United Nations Headquarters in New York. The Study Group is = composed by eight experts, participating in their individual capacity, representing different regions of the world and different realities (Argentina, South Africa, Switzerland, Finland, the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research, USA, Ireland and Slovakia). The Study Group has been entrusted with the challenging task of preparing the first-ever UN report on the issue, and as a part of the global strategy to curb the excessive and destabilizing accumulation of small arms. In this sense, the Study Group defined his own task as: carrying out a = study that, without prejudice to the legitimate possession, trade and use of ammunition and explosives, seeks to assess whether and how enhanced = controls of ammunition and explosives can contribute to preventing and reducing the excessive and destabilizing accumulation and proliferation, as well as the abuse of small arms. The Study Group established a framework for the study and divided the work among its members according to specialization and regions of origin. The first draft framework included different sections such as the definition of the mandate and authority of the Study Group, identification of the problem of ammunition and explosives; providers, consumers, transfers, stocks, surpluses, regional characteristics, existing forms of control and options for improving control. The Study Group has also drafted a questionnaire which was transmitted to governments, producers, trade associations and other actors involved in = the production or traffic of ammunition and explosives. This questionnaire includes inquiries related to capacity of production, exports and imports, illegal trafficking, transfers of technology, destruction of stocks and surpluses, transport legislation and international exchange of information.= Moreover, there is also a technical section including inquiries on the = types of ammunition and explosives used or identified in a given country. Based on the information received from this questionnaire, as well as from other sources of information, the Study Group will consider a set of recommendations and proposals to enhance control over ammunition and explosives, as a part of the overall strategy to control the excessive proliferation, accumulation and use of small arms and light weapons. A = close connection between the Study Group and the Group of Governmental Experts = on Small Arms is envisaged. The second session of the Study Group is scheduled to be held from 11 to = 15 January 1999 at UN Headquarters. -------[Cybershooters website & subscription info]-------- http://www.forge.demon.co.uk/cybershooters/ or email pj@forge.demon.co.uk ****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: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: FEAR: Feds deluged with protests over KYC Date: 11 Dec 1998 09:56:16 -0700 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Fri, 11 Dec 1998 08:04:26 -0700 Received: from americium.baremetal.com by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id HAA16605; Fri, 11 Dec 1998 07:51:05 -0700 Received: from localhost (mapinc@localhost) by americium.baremetal.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with SMTP id HAA26022; Fri, 11 Dec 1998 07:01:58 -0800 Received: by americium.baremetal.com (bulk_mailer v1.5); Fri, 11 Dec 1998 15:01:43 +0000 Received: (from mapinc@localhost) by americium.baremetal.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id HAA25989 for fear-list-outgoing@mapinc.org; Fri, 11 Dec 1998 07:01:43 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: americium.baremetal.com: mapinc set sender to owner-fear-list@mapinc.org using -f Message-ID: <000d01be2516$edd01d60$18be7dd1@grummk.odc.edu> "Rosie Retter" , "Hemp-talk" , "FEAR-List" , "Brian Todd" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Sender: owner-fear-list@mapinc.org Reply-To: "Karen Grumm" Organization: Forfeiture Endangers American Rights http://www.fear.org/ Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline -----Original Message----- regulation >=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 >SCAN THIS NEWS >12/10/98 > >---------------------- >New anti-money laundering rules spark big protest on bank privacy >5.26 p.m. ET (2226 GMT) December 10, 1998 > >By Marcy Gordon, Associated Press > >WASHINGTON (AP) * Federal regulators are being deluged with thousands of >e-mail messages from citizens furious about new anti-money laundering = rules >that they view as an invasion of privacy. > >As a visible symbol of the federal government with a plaque in every bank >branch, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. has become a magnet for >consumers' anger over the proposed rules. > >But regulators at other federal banking agencies also reported Thursday they >had received many protesting e-mails, letters and telephone calls * some = of >them apparently instigated by anti-government groups. > >The ire is directed at the proposed regulations, called "Know Your >Customer'' rules, that would require banks to verify their customers' >identities and know where their money comes from. Banks also would have = to >determine customers' normal pattern of transactions and report any >"suspicious'' transactions to law enforcement authorities. > >The proposal, published Monday in the Federal Register, is designed to >combat money laundering techniques used by drug traffickers and other >criminals to hide illegal profits. Laundering includes the use of wire >transfers and bank drafts as well as "smurfing,'' the practice of = breaking >down transactions into smaller amounts that don't have to be reported = under >banking laws. > >The torrent of e-mail, first reported in The Wall Street Journal = Thursday, >came as the 90-day public comment period opened for the proposal. > >It reflects growing anxiety among consumers about banks' use of personal >financial data * a concern that prompted a top federal regulator to warn the >banking industry this spring that it needs to protect customers' privacy. > >Someone from Texas wrote, "I am appalled at even the suggestion of such = an >intrusion into our personal lives by the federal government.'' > >In another message, a Florida doctor told the regulators: "Next you'll = ... >be implanting (an electronic) chip in newborns at birth so they can be >scanned as they walk in any banks as an adult.'' > >FDIC spokesman David Barr said the agency had received a staggering 2,700 >e-mails and letters opposing the proposal. > >At least some of the angry messages appear to have been inspired by >anti-government groups claiming the proposed rules are part of a federal >conspiracy aimed at limiting people's constitutional rights, according to >the Journal and people close to the situation. > >Regulators and banking industry officials, who worked together on the new >rules, have taken pains to reassure consumers that their privacy would be >protected under the changes. > >"Because of privacy concerns, it is the ... expectation that banks would >obtain only that information that is necessary to comply with the rule, = and >would limit the use of this information to that purpose,'' the Office of the >Comptroller of the Currency, which regulates nationally chartered banks, >said in a statement. > >John Byrne, senior counsel of the American Bankers Association, said, = "Joe >Q. Citizen needs to recognize that there's nothing for him or her to = worry >about.'' > >comments@foxnews.com >=A9 1998, News America Digital Publishing, Inc. d/b/a Fox News Online. > >-----Original Message----- >From: W.G.E.N. [mailto:idzrus@earthlink.net] >Sent: Thursday, December 10, 1998 6:30 PM >To: idzrus@earthlink.net >Subject: NID:"KYC" Feds being deluged with Email protest > > >=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 >Don't believe anything you read on the Net unless: >1) you can confirm it with another source, and/or >2) it is consistent with what you already know to be true. >=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 >Reply to: >=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 > To subscribe to the free Scan This News newsletter, send a message to > and type "subscribe scan" in the BODY. > Or, to be removed type "unsubscribe scan" in the message BODY. > For additional instructions see www.efga.org/about/maillist.html >----------------------------------------------------------------------- > "Scan This News" is Sponsored by S.C.A.N. > Host of the "FIGHT THE FINGERPRINT!" web page: > www.networkusa.org/fingerprint.shtml >=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 > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: FW: Lawsuit Date: 13 Dec 1998 14:34:17 -0700 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Sun, 13 Dec 1998 08:57:53 -0700 Received: from fs1.mainstream.net by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id IAA18438; Sun, 13 Dec 1998 08:44:34 -0700 Received: from (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA07979; Sun, 13 Dec 1998 10:56:09 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199812131530.IAA24065@mail2.rockymtn.net> Errors-To: listproc@mainstream.net Reply-To: 70274.1222@compuserve.com Originator: noban@mainstream.net Sender: noban@mainstream.net Precedence: first-class 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 News Release Second Amendment Foundation 12500 NE Tenth Place * Bellevue, WA 98005 (425) 454-7012 * FAX (425) 451-3959 For Immediate Release =20 =20 Contact: =20 Alan Gottlieb (425) 454-7012 Joseph P. Tartaro (716) 885-6408 Prof. Daniel D. Polsby (312) 503-8955 =20 MAYORS FACE LAWSUIT BY GUN OWNER GROUP BELLEVUE, WA (December 9, 1998)-The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), a gun owner advocacy and educational organization, notified the US Conference of Mayors in a faxed letter dated Dec. 8 that it plans to sponsor a "damage action" against the cities of Chicago and New Orleans for conspiracy to violate civil rights, abuse of process and undue burden on interstate commerce. The Foundation's letter to J. Thomas Cochran, executive director of the US Conference of Mayors, said that a steering committee of distinguished law professors, who will serve without compensation, has been assembled as a response to the "frivolous suits" which New Orleans and Chicago filed recently against firearms manufacturers, their trade associations and federally licensed firearms dealers. SAF warned the mayors' conference on the eve of its scheduled Dec. 10 meeting in Chicago that the suit which it expected to file in Louisiana early next year will also name any other cities which follow the New Orleans and Chicago lead. Noting that the mayors had invited lawyers involved in the suits against the firearms industry to address the meeting, Alan M. Gottlieb, founder of the Second Amendment Foundation, encouraged the conference to also invite a rebuttal presentation by a member of the 12-member steering committee, Daniel D. Polsby, Kirkland & Ellis professor of law at Northwestern University. "From coast to coast, noted law professors seem to agree with the many newspaper editorials which have suggested that the lawsuits filed by the cities of New Orleans and Chicago against firearms manufacturers and marketers are ill-conceived, ill-advised and totally without merit," said Gottlieb. "Whatever problems the cities may have with the criminal and negligent misuse of firearms, their suits against the gun manufacturers make as much sense as suing the National Weather Bureau for the cost of storm damages," Gottlieb added. Even newspapers and magazines which advocate strict controls over firearms and their purchasers have with unusual consistency questioned the advisability of the kind of suits that have been filed by the cities against the firearms industry. They see these as an attempt to pervert the concept of product liability as an extension of the arguments used in the state attorneys general suits against the tobacco industry. "The nature and status of guns and tobacco are not analogous," said Joseph P. Tartaro, president of SAF. "Firearms have a significant beneficial use in our society beyond recreation, since independent research shows they are used over 2 million times a year to prevent or terminate predatory criminal assaults." "The New Orleans and Chicago lawsuits are not only frivolous they are dangerous because they are an extension of legal and political buccaneering that will rape Americans of the means to self-defense while looting a legal industry." "The Foundation's primary interest is to safeguard the traditional legal rights of law-abiding and peaceable American gun owners," Gottlieb said. "We are not industry advocates. Gun makers and sellers just happen to be the visible targets of the frivolous actions brought by New Orleans and Chicago. If these were standard product liability suits, we wouldn't have more than a passing interest in what the cities are attempting to do." The law professors on the Foundation's steering committee for the lawsuit against the cities besides Prof. Polsby are: Steven Calabresi, professor of law, Northwestern University, Chicago; Robert A. Carter, professor of law and Judge Alexander P. Waugh Sr. scholar, Rutgers University-Newark; Robert J. Cottrol, professor of constitutional law and legal history, George Washington University, Washington, DC; Michael I. Krauss, professor of law, George Mason University, Arlington, VA; Gary S. Lawson, professor of law, Northwestern University, Chicago; Calvin R. Massey, Hastings College of Law, San Francisco; John McGinnis, Cardozo Law School, New York City; Glenn Harlan Reynolds, professor of law, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN; Charles E. Rice, professor of law; Notre Dame University, South Bend, IN; Larry Soderquist, professor of law and director of the Corporate and Securities Law Institute, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN;, and George Strickler, professor, Tulane University Law School, New Orleans, LA. The Second Amendment Foundation is a tax-exempt education, legal action and publishing group founded in 1974 and now has over 600,000 individual citizen supporters nationwide. It previously has funded successful firearms-related suits against the cities of Los Angeles, New Haven, CT, and San Francisco on behalf of American gun owners. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "S. Thompson" Subject: She's BAAAAAACK! Date: 14 Dec 1998 15:03:07 -0700 Hi all! Just a quick note to let you know that I'm back on Utah-firearms for at least the duration of the legislative session. It looks like it will be an ugly one, so I figure the more we can communicate and cooperate, the better. I will probably be starting a legislative alert mail list (assuming I can figure out how to get it set up!), although it will offer my opinions alone, and will not be affiliated with USSC. (Where we agree, we will, of course, cooperate!) Next up - the U. of U.'s anti-gun curriculum for medical students and physicians....... My best wishes to all of you for a very Happy Holiday Season! Sarah Sarah Thompson, M.D. http://www.therighter.com Stop the Gun Ban! NO-lympics 2002! Check out http://www.therighter.com/column/Olympics.html - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "S. Thompson" Subject: Re: Univ. of Utah hoplophobes Date: 14 Dec 1998 15:07:27 -0700 Thanks to Dr. Tim Wheeler for alerting me to this problem, and for writing such a cogent response. Please feel free to forward his article to anyone you think would find it of interest and/or benefit. Also, if anyone has any suggestions on how to present an opposing point of view to the University and/or its students, please let me or Tim know. Thanks! Sarah The following was written by Dr. Wheeler: Hoplophobia at the University of Utah: Gun Control in the Pathology Curriculum by Timothy Wheeler, MD Director of Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership, a Project of The Claremont Institute Prejudice toward guns and their owners is endemic in the academic world. Famed firearm instructor Col. Jeff Cooper coined the term "hoplophobia" (from the Greek root hoplon, or weapon) to describe an irrational aversion to firearms. The University of Utah Department of Pathology's Edward C. Klatt, MD has created a CD-ROM for health care science students, available on the Web at http://www-medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/GUNS/GUNINTRO.html. This on-line tutorial is an example of how presumably objective teachers are allowed to color facts with their own jaundiced view of firearms ownership. The tutorial's author commits three fundamental offenses against science: 1) He presents factually false and misleading statements as true. 2) He omits large chunks of established criminology research which demonstrate societal benefits of firearms. 3) He does all this under the imprimatur of the University of Utah, impeaching that fine institution's scientific reputation. In the Statistics, Gun Control Issues, and Safety section of the tutorial one gets a flavor of the author's bias against guns. In addition to complaining about the National Rifle Association and about government being slow to "severely restrict the...use of firearms by ordinary citizens", the author presents these fictions: FICTION: "... technically, the application of this [the Second] amendment applied to the maintenance of a militia, and not private gun ownership..." FACT: Since 1980 over 60 law review articles have been published on the issue of "states' right versus individual right" interpretations of the Second Amendment to the U.S. constitution. Fewer than 10 of these articles conclude that the Second Amendment affirms a right of state governments to "keep and bear arms." (1) The scholars who wrote the other 50 plus articles determine, sometimes despite their own admitted abhorrence of guns, that the Second Amendment clearly affirms an individual right of gun ownership. FICTION: "Both accidental and homicidal shooting deaths have increased over the past several decades..." FACT: On the contrary, accidental shooting deaths have decreased over the last six decades, and continue to decrease. (2) Homicidal shootings did increase over the period from 1987 to 1991 (3), but have been decreasing since then. (4) This temporary increase has been attributed to the crack cocaine epidemic of that time, which featured an increase in gun homicides among drug dealers and their customers. These statistics tell us nothing about the great majority of American gun owners, who are not affiliated with street gangs or the illicit drug trade. The firearms tutorial's introduction implies an even-handed treatment of gun issues that it fails to deliver. Conspicuously missing from the text and bibliography are any references to the voluminous criminology literature on guns. Even though scholars like the University of Chicago's John Lott (5) and Florida State University criminology professor Gary Kleck have published acclaimed, widely publicized books on firearms use and abuse, we see no mention of them in the University of Utah's pathology tutorial on guns. Was the tutorial's author really unaware of the work of these scholars? That is hard to believe. It's also hard to avoid the conclusion that he omitted these works for one simple reason: they show convincingly that firearms in the hands of responsible citizens not only are safe, but save lives, protect property, and reduce injuries by defending against violent criminals. Medical students and others unfamiliar with the scientific literature on guns may find all this hard to believe. We encourage you to maintain that healthy skepticism, but to look at the references listed in the endnotes. You have the skills to analyze the science and to decide for yourselves whether firearms are a public health threat or simply a tool like any other, to be used for good or evil according to the user. In early 1999 the Claremont Institute will publish Firearms: a Handbook for Health Professionals. This booklet contains over 20 pages of facts and figures about firearms. It summarizes firearm research of not only Kleck, but of his main academic critics Cook and Ludwig. John Lott's elaborate study of concealed carry laws is digested for quick reference, with graphs and text showing the highlights of his now-famous work. Students interested in the part of the gun debate not included in the University of Utah's pathology curriculum can check out Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership at the Claremont Institute's web site (see directions below, after the endnotes). Watch the site for announcement of the Handbook's release, with ordering instructions. In closing, we make a plea to the University of Utah Department of Pathology to re-examine its commitment to scientific integrity. Science demands rigorous honesty, and that means examining all the data, not just the data that support our fears and prejudices. Your reputation depends on that honesty. Your students deserve no less. Endnotes 1) Kates D and Kleck G, The Great American Gun Debate: Essays on Firearms and Violence, Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy, San Francisco 1997, 38-43. 2) Accident Facts-1997 Edition, National Safety Council, Itasca, IL 1997: 44-45. 3) Kleck G, Targeting Guns: Firearms and Their Control, Aldine de Gruyter, New York 1997, 256-259, 262-263. 4) Uniform Crime Reports for the United States 1996, U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, DC, 1997: 18 (Table 2.10). Note: Uniform Crime Report methodology reports this statistic as total firearm murders, which do not include negligent or justifiable homicides. 5) Lott J, More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws, University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London 1998. Presented by: Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership a Project of The Claremont Institute P.O. Box 1931 Upland, CA 91785-1931 e-mail drgotww@aol.com Claremont Institute World Wide Web site: http://www.claremont.org For more information about DRGO go to About The Claremont Institute, then scroll down to Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership. To see all DRGO editorial articles, go to Publications, then to The Second Amendment. voice message / fax (909) 949-9971 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: For lack of a gun... Date: 15 Dec 1998 16:58:32 -0700 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Mon, 14 Dec 1998 23:38:21 -0700 Received: from fs1.mainstream.net by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id XAA20216; Mon, 14 Dec 1998 23:24:59 -0700 Received: from (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with SMTP id BAA17409; Tue, 15 Dec 1998 01:36:34 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: Errors-To: listproc@mainstream.net Reply-To: dugga@pacifier.com Originator: noban@mainstream.net Sender: noban@mainstream.net Precedence: first-class 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 "Arlington, Wash. (AP)- A fire in which eight women died at a boarding = home last spring was started in a suicide attempt by a mentally ill resident, a newspaper reported." If the poor, unfortunate suicidal person in the above story had been able to obtain a firearm, perhaps eight innocent women would be alive today. Remember, "if it saves just one life..."... - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: FEAR: fwd: ACLU ad "Did You Know the Money in Your Wallet Date: 16 Dec 1998 10:16:01 -0700 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 08:47:48 -0700 Received: from americium.baremetal.com by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id PAA21084; Tue, 15 Dec 1998 15:55:26 -0700 Received: from localhost (mapinc@localhost) by americium.baremetal.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with SMTP id PAA18437; Tue, 15 Dec 1998 15:06:18 -0800 Received: by americium.baremetal.com (bulk_mailer v1.5); Tue, 15 Dec 1998 23:05:24 +0000 Received: (from mapinc@localhost) by americium.baremetal.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id PAA18227 for fear-list-outgoing@mapinc.org; Tue, 15 Dec 1998 15:05:24 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: americium.baremetal.com: mapinc set sender to owner-fear-list@mapinc.org using -f Message-Id: Sender: owner-fear-list@mapinc.org Reply-To: cheechwz@mindspring.com (A H Clements) Organization: Forfeiture Endangers American Rights http://www.fear.org/ Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline [Forwarded from the ACLU newsfeed . The ad can be seena at http://www.aclu.org/features/nytimesad121198.html ] ACLU Op-Ed Advertisement Asks: "Did You Know the Money in Your Wallet Could Be Legally Confiscated?" FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Friday, December 11, 1998 NEW YORK--Police agencies across the country are relieving innocent people of cash, cars and other property -- and it's all perfectly legal, the American Civil Liberties Union warned today. In the ninth installment of its public policy advertising campaign running on the op-ed page of The New York Times and The New Republic, the ACLU said that because 75 percent of American money is tainted with cocaine, police have the right to seize people's cash, as well as any other assets they can get their hands on. "In 1984, Congress gave police the right to keep and spend any 'drug-related' assets they seize," the advertisement says. "Police have since taken cars, homes, restaurants, and cash in epidemic proportions. And they can use these assets for anything from patrol cars to parties." The year-long advertising campaign, a first-ever effort for the 78-year-old organization, has run on The New York Times op-ed page once a month during 1998. Each ad contained a briefly worded message from ACLU Executive Director Ira Glasser on topical subjects ranging from the war on drugs to religious freedom to government intrusions in the bedroom. In the current ad, Glasser says that most of the victims of government forfeiture laws aren't criminals. "Like the 75-year-old grandmother who lost her home because her drug-dealing son had once lived there. Or the landscaper whose $9,000 was seized at the airport because 'only drug dealers carry that much cash.'" Those and other stories have landed the issue before Congress, prompting House Judiciary Chairman Henry Hyde, R-IL, to introduce the bi-partisan "Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act" to overhaul the nation's laws on property seizures. In June 1997 Congressional testimony supporting the bill, ACLU President Nadine Strossen said that reforms are critically needed because "innocent property owners, or those who have committed only minor infractions are now subject to draconian punishments and property deprivations." The bill is expected to be re-introduced in the 106th Congress, and the ACLU is urging people to support the measure. One leading historian, today's ad notes, calls forfeiture laws nothing less than a government "license to steal." "The war on drugs has become a war on the Constitution," the ad concludes. "What kind of country rewards its police for shaking down its own citizens?" To further stimulate public discussion, the ad will have an interactive component through a "message board" on the ACLU's Freedom Network Website at http://www.aclu.org/features/nytimesad121198.html. Visitors to the website will be able to access background information on the subject of this month's ad, and will be invited to post their own thoughts to an interactive message board. Today's ad concludes the op-ed series for 1998. The ACLU said that it is contemplating continuing the popular feature in the coming year. The ACLU is a nationwide, non-partisan organization dedicated to defending and preserving the Bill of Rights for all individuals through litigation, legislation and public education. Headquartered in New York City, the ACLU has 53 staffed affiliates in major cities, more than 300 chapters nationwide, and a legislative office in Washington. The bulk of its $35 million annual budget is raised by contributions from members -- 275,000 strong -- and gifts and grants from other individuals and foundations. The ACLU does not accept government funds. The new ACLU advertisement can be found at: http://www.aclu.org/features/nytimesad121198.html - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: AMA "Gun Safety" hoax!! Date: 16 Dec 1998 10:27:36 -0700 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 08:47:18 -0700 Received: from listbox.com by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id UAA21329; Tue, 15 Dec 1998 20:22:45 -0700 Received: (qmail 23234 invoked by uid 516); 16 Dec 1998 03:34:20 -0000 Delivered-To: rkba-co@majordomo.pobox.com Received: (qmail 23173 invoked from network); 16 Dec 1998 03:34:13 -0000 Received: from growl.pobox.com (208.210.124.27) by majordomo.pobox.com with SMTP; 16 Dec 1998 03:34:13 -0000 Received: from mail2.rockymtn.net (ns2.rockymtn.net [166.93.8.2]) by growl.pobox.com (VMailer) with ESMTP id CB6F27B4; Tue, 15 Dec 1998 22:33:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from 166-93-76-2.rmi.net (166-93-76-2.rmi.net [166.93.76.2]) by mail2.rockymtn.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id TAA26260; Tue, 15 Dec 1998 19:54:21 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <199812160254.TAA26260@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 jpfo@dbeatty.worldweb.net (by way of Douglas Davis = ) ----------------------- Physicians & Firearms: What Will Your Doctor Prescribe? Your physician might soon receive a copy of the American Medical Association's (AMA) "new guide for physicians on how to counsel their patients about firearm safety."1 Funded by the anti-gun Joyce Foundation, about 70,000 copies of the guide will be distributed nationwide. Under the guise of "patient counseling," doctors using the AMA materials will be discouraging people from owning or using firearms. We haven't seen a copy of the guide yet, but it is described as "a safety primer [which] offers doctors an overview of the public health and clinical issues involved in firearm use, including a review of the epidemiology of gunshot injuries and deaths."2 We anticipate that the guide contains the bogus statistical claims that merely having a gun in your home greatly increases your risk of being killed by a person with somebody's gun. JPFO and others have debunked these statistics,3 but the gun prohibitionists will likely be peddling these stats without providing the opposing views. One section of the guide reportedly also "describes different types of guns and ammunition doctors should know about." JPFO agrees that doctors, and everyone else, should have a working knowledge of firearms. Unfortunately, however, the guide will likely describe firearms not as tools or potential life savers ... but more like a medical book might describe a virus, a poison, or a biting insect. Competent firearms instructors need not fear competition from doctors. We'd be astounded if the AMA guide teaches real gun safety, e.g., how to carry a firearm, how to position the trigger finger when not actually shooting, how to clear the chamber, how to always point the firearm in a safe direction, safe cleaning techniques, and how to remove a misfired round. And we are unaware of any plans for the AMA to build shooting ranges for its members ... or their patients. Every new wave of "gun control" activism brings a new opportunity to get our message out to interested people. Don't let the AMA's propaganda go unchallenged. Here's your action item list: 1. Buy a 25-copy bundle of JPFO's special report entitled "Disarming the Data Doctors." ($19.95 U.S. post paid). Send or deliver copies to doctors and other health care professionals. Send them anonymously if you want ... but get the information to them. Include a very brief note to say that this report will counteract the what the AMA is preaching in its new "gun violence" guide. 2. Get copies of Brasco the Bear (tm) Firearm Safety coloring books for younger kids -- so that they will learn real gun safety with a balanced view. 3. If you haven't taken a professional gun safety course, then you should enroll in one soon. You will not only learn how to operate firearms safely (and accurately), but you will also be able to see the big difference between the AMA's approach and true gun safety information. Don't forget: No other gun rights group in America gives you as many different ways to destroy "gun control" as JPFO does. Take action -- do it today! Visit our website at http://www.jpfo.org or call us at (414) = 769-0760 or fax us at (414) 483-8435. You can also send mail to: Jews For the Preservation of Firearms Ownership 2874 So. Wentworth Ave. Milwaukee, WI 53207 = =20 = =20 Endnotes: 1Deborah L. Shelton, AMA urges physicians to counsel on firearm safety, Am. Med. News, December 7, 1998, p. 57. 2 Ibid. 3 See Richard W. Stevens, Disarming the Data Doctors: How to Debunk the "Public Health" Argument for "Gun Control," The Firearms Sentinel, Winter 1997, pp. 2-6. 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: How You Can Influence the Vote for Impeachment Date: 16 Dec 1998 12:33:16 -0700 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 11:17:36 -0700 Received: from neptune.ConnectI.com by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id LAA22138; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 11:04:10 -0700 Received: from utbook.connecti.com (sa4-229.ConnectI.com [206.81.244.229]) by neptune.ConnectI.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id LAA26302; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 11:43:14 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981216113453.008d0210@mailhost.connecti.com> X-Sender: butterb@mailhost.connecti.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline It does not take much effort for you to send one e-mail message. =20 This has been pre-digested so all you have to do is copy the=20 addresses in the To: field. The following are e-mail addresses for congresscritters who=20 currently need to be convinced to vote for impeachment: talk2jay@mail.house.gov, brian.bilbray@mail.house.gov,=20 delaware@mail.house.gov, shimkus@mail.house.gov,=20 rep.morella@mail.house.gov, rep.boehlert@mail.house.gov,=20 ben@mail.house.gov, lazio@mail.house.gov, jon.fox@mail.house.gov,=20 badger02@mail.house.gov, rep.goode@mail.house.gov,=20 rmhall@mail.house.gov, gene.taylor@mail.house.gov,=20 budmail@mail.house.gov, rep.condit@mail.house.gov,=20 carolyn.maloney@mail.house.gov, rep.boswell.ia032@mail.hou se.gov,=20 tim.roemer@mail.house.gov, christopher.john@mail.house.gov,=20 telljim@mail.house.gov, mchale@mail.house.gov,=20 murtha@mail.house.gov, bart.gordon@mail.house.gov,=20 taxes17@mail.house.gov, jim.moran@mail.house.gov,=20 jay.johnson@mail.house.gov The addresses are identified at: http://www.sm.org/exegesis/votes.html for Liberty, Bill Utterback http://www.connecti.com/~utbook - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "S. Thompson" Subject: Re: Fwd: For lack of a gun... Date: 16 Dec 1998 17:21:28 -0700 At 04:58 PM 12/15/98 -0700, you wrote: >"Arlington, Wash. (AP)- A fire in which eight women died at a boarding home >last spring was started in a suicide attempt by a mentally ill resident, a >newspaper reported." > >If the poor, unfortunate suicidal person in the above story had been able >to obtain a firearm, perhaps eight innocent women would be alive today. > >Remember, "if it saves just one life..."... > Oh really! Wouldn't you just love to see Scott Howell stand up and read this at the legislature? It does us no service to propose that seriously mentally ill people be allowed access to firearms in order to commit suicide. Certainly this illustrates the need for better mental health care, or possibly even assisted suicide, but it's not much of an argument for firearms rights. Sarah Sarah Thompson, M.D. http://www.therighter.com Stop the Gun Ban! NO-lympics 2002! Check out http://www.therighter.com/column/Olympics.html And now you can link directly to the Nolympics page too! - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: The Left has formed phone banks and are pushing hard Date: 16 Dec 1998 17:48:52 -0700 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 15:21:02 -0700 Received: from fs1.mainstream.net by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id PAA22409; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 15:07:35 -0700 Received: from (server@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with SMTP id RAA15285; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 17:19:02 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <367586AF.4A00@attymail.com> Errors-To: listproc@mainstream.net Reply-To: jurist@attymail.com Originator: noban@mainstream.net Sender: noban@mainstream.net Precedence: first-class 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 - Don't let them win once again. Attention RKBA Defenders, This is no time to get comfortable. This morning I called every fence- sitting representative on this page. =20 Please call and say "please tell the Representative to vote for impeachment" and then move onto the next representative. The e-mail servers have been backed up and are no longer even being read. Your call really does count! We need to get this guy out! Fourty minutes out of your lifetime in what may be the last best chance of casting out this abomination. http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3674cc9939ea.htm Thank you so very much. Rick V. >"Still if you will not fight for the right when you can easily win=20 without bloodshed, if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not so costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no chance of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves." -- Winston Churchill. --=20 The Right to Self Defense is a Fundamental Human Right - RKBA - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: A SOLDIERS CHRISTMAS Date: 17 Dec 1998 14:42:44 -0700 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Thu, 17 Dec 1998 08:47:36 -0700 Received: from THIOKOL.COM by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id IAA23278; Thu, 17 Dec 1998 08:34:03 -0700 Received: from UTAH-Message_Server by THIOKOL.COM with Novell_GroupWise; Thu, 17 Dec 1998 08:45:15 -0700 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline A SOLDIERS CHRISTMAS=20 'TWAS THE NIGHT BEFORE CHRISTMAS, HE LIVED ALL ALONE, IN A ONE BEDROOM HOUSE MADE OF PLASTER AND STONE. I HAD COME DOWN THE CHIMNEY WITH PRESENTS TO GIVE, AND TO SEE JUST WHO IN THIS HOME DID LIVE. I LOOKED ALL ABOUT, A STRANGE SIGHT I DID SEE, NO TINSEL, NO PRESENTS, NOT EVEN A TREE. NO STOCKING BY MANTLE, JUST BOOTS FILLED WITH SAND, ON THE WALL HUNG PICTURES OF FAR DISTANT LANDS. WITH MEDALS AND BADGES, AWARDS OF ALL KINDS, A SOBER THOUGHT CAME THROUGH MY MIND. FOR THIS HOUSE WAS DIFFERENT, IT WAS DARK AND DREARY, I FOUND THE HOME OF A SOLDIER, ONCE I COULD SEE CLEARLY. THE SOLDIER LAY SLEEPING, SILENT, ALONE, CURLED UP ON THE FLOOR IN THIS ONE BEDROOM HOME. THE FACE WAS SO GENTLE, THE ROOM IN SUCH DISORDER, NOT HOW I PICTURED A UNITED STATES SOLDIER. WAS THIS THE HERO OF WHOM I'D JUST READ? CURLED UP ON A PONCHO, THE FLOOR FOR A BED? I REALIZED THE FAMILIES THAT I SAW THIS NIGHT, OWED THEIR LIVES TO THESE SOLDIERS WHO WERE WILLING TO FIGHT. SOON ROUND THE WORLD, THE CHILDREN WOULD PLAY, AND GROWNUPS WOULD CELEBRATE A BRIGHT CHRISTMAS DAY. THEY ALL ENJOYED FREEDOM EACH MONTH OF THE YEAR, BECAUSE OF THE SOLDIERS, LIKE THE ONE LYING HERE. I COULDN'T HELP WONDER HOW MANY LAY ALONE, ON A COLD CHRISTMAS EVE IN A LAND FAR FROM HOME. THE VERY THOUGHT BROUGHT A TEAR TO MY EYE, I DROPPED TO MY KNEES AND STARTED TO CRY. THE SOLDIER AWAKENED AND I HEARD A ROUGH VOICE, "SANTA DON'T CRY, THIS LIFE IS MY CHOICE; I FIGHT FOR FREEDOM, I DON'T ASK FOR MORE, MY LIFE IS MY GOD, MY COUNTRY, MY CORPS."; THE SOLDIER ROLLED OVER AND DRIFTED TO SLEEP, I COULDN'T CONTROL IT, I CONTINUED TO WEEP. I KEPT WATCH FOR HOURS, SO SILENT AND STILL AND WE BOTH SHIVERED FROM THE COLD NIGHT'S CHILL. I DIDN'T WANT TO LEAVE ON THAT COLD, DARK, NIGHT, THIS GUARDIAN OF HONOR SO WILLING TO FIGHT. THEN THE SOLDIER ROLLED OVER, WITH A VOICE SOFT AND PURE, WHISPERED, "CARRY ON SANTA, IT'S CHRISTMAS DAY, ALL IS SECURE."; ONE LOOK AT MY WATCH, AND I KNEW HE WAS RIGHT, MERRY CHRISTMAS MY FRIEND, AND TO ALL A GOOD NIGHT. PLEASE. Would you do me the kind favor of sending this to as may people as you can? Christmas will be coming soon and we should all be aware of where credit for our being able to celebrate these festivities is due. Let's = try in this small way to pay a tiny bit of what we owe. Make people stop and think of our heroes, living and dead, who sacrificed themselves for us.=20 Please, do your small part to plant this small Seed Belleau Wood "Oh, the snowflakes fell in silence over Belleau Wood that night For a Christmas truce had been declared=20 By both sides of the fight As we lay there in our trenches The silence broke in two By a German soldier singing A song that we all knew Though I did not know the language The song was "Silent Night"; Then I heard my buddy whisper, "All is calm and all is bright"; Then the fear and doubt surrounded me 'Cause I'd die if I was wrong But I stood up in my trench And=20 I began to sing along Then across the frozen battlefield Another's voice joined in Until one by one each man became A singer of the hymn Then I thought that I was dreaming For right there in my sight Stood the German soldier 'Neath the falling flakes of white And he raised his hand and smiled at me As if he seemed to say Here's hoping we both live To see us find a better way Then the devil's clock struck midnight And the skies lit up again And the battlefield where heaven stood Was blown to hell again But for just one fleeting moment The answer seemed so clear=20 Heaven's not beyond the clouds It's just beyond the fear No, heaven's not beyond the clouds It's for us to find it here Belleau Wood: Joe Henry and Garth Brooks Copy Write 1997 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: [Fwd: Fw: [Fwd: A Miserable Scenario part 1]] Date: 17 Dec 1998 17:47:51 -0700 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 22:14:07 -0700 Received: from mail.sisna.com by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id WAA22807; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 22:00:41 -0700 Message-Id: <199812170500.WAA22807@wvc> Received: from rserzen.sisna.com [209.210.178.101] by mail.sisna.com (SMTPD32-4.06) id A25B9F010C; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 22:10:51 MST Reply-To: "rserzen@sisna.com"@sisna.com Organization: Sunrise Medical X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-KIT (Win95; U) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Received: from mailhost.pioneer-net.com [206.58.81.4] by mail.sisna.com with ESMTP (SMTPD32-4.06) id AACB14D7007E; Tue, 15 Dec 1998 22:53:15 MST Received: from obsidian (rp28.pioneer-net.com [206.58.81.43]) by mailhost.pioneer-net.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id WAA32718 for ; Tue, 15 Dec 1998 22:59:04 -0800 Message-ID: <003401be28b8$5f944a80$2b513ace@obsidian> X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=_AFF8ED2E.77167B7B" --=_AFF8ED2E.77167B7B Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline heres a little story to get your blood moving -----Original Message----- Date: Tuesday, December 15, 1998 7:21 PM > > --=_AFF8ED2E.77167B7B Content-Type: message/rfc822 Received: from mail.tignet.com ([199.231.128.3]) by mta1.mailsrvcs.net (InterMail v03.02.04 118 119) with ESMTP id <19981216004806.EIWX14453@mail.tignet.com> for ; Tue, 15 Dec 1998 18:48:06 -0600 Received: from ron.tampabay.rr.com (dt0d3nb3.tampabay.rr.com [24.92.171.179]) by mail.tignet.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id UAA03829 for ; Tue, 15 Dec 1998 20:44:51 -0500 Message-Id: <2.2.32.19981216004948.006bb638@mail.tignet.com> X-Sender: atozstuff-atoz@mail.tignet.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline >Return-Path: >Mailing-List: ListBot mailing list contact membercouncil-help@listbot.com >Delivered-To: mailing list membercouncil@listbot.com >From: REBarnes50@aol.com >Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 09:35:26 EST >To: membercouncil@listbot.com >Subject: A Miserable Scenario part 1 > >Member Council of Tampa Bay - http://home.tampabay.rr.com/membercouncil > >The following has been forwarded for your reading. I almost said "your >reading pleasure". It should push a lot of your buttons....Part 1 >Robert >Florida >=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 > >Subj: A Miserable Scenario >Date: 12/12/98 12:07:39 AM Eastern Standard Time >From: brant@nettally.com (Chaisson, Brant) >To: fssa-talk@freenet.tlh.fl.us ('FSSA') >CC: trpc-talk@tfn.net ('Tallahassee Rifle and Pistol Club') > >Sundown at Coffin Rock >by Raymond K. Paden > >The old man walked slowly through the dry, fallen leaves of autumn, = his=20 >practiced eye automatically choosing the bare and stony places in the = trail=20 >for his feet. There was scarcely a sound as he passed, though his left = knee=20 >was stiff with scar tissue. He grunted occasionally as the tight = sinews=20 >pulled. Damn chainsaw, he thought. >Behind him, the boy shuffled along, trying to imitate his grandfather, = but=20 >unable to mimic the silent motion that the old man had learned during=20 >countless winter days upon this wooded mountain in pursuit of game. = He's=20 >fifteen years old, the old man thought. Plenty old enough to be = learning.=20 > But that was another time, another America. His mind drifted, and he = saw=20 >himself, a fifteen-year-old boy following in the footsteps of his own=20 >grandfather, clutching a twelve gauge in his trembling hands as they=20 >tracked a wounded whitetail. >The leg was hurting worse now, and he slowed his pace a bit. Plenty of=20 >time. >It should have been my own son here with me now, the old man thought = sadly.=20 > But Jason had no interest, no understanding. He cared for nothing but=20 >pounding on the keys of that damned computer terminal. He knew nothing=20 >about the woods, or where food came from...or freedom. And that's my = fault,=20 >isn't it? >The old man stopped and held up his hand, motioning for the boy to look. = In=20 >the small clearing ahead, the deer stood motionless, watching them. It = was=20 >a scraggly buck, underfed and sickly, but the boy's eyes lit up with=20 >excitement. It had been many years since they had seen even a single=20 >whitetail here on the mountain. After the hunting had stopped, the=20 >population had exploded. The deer had eaten the mountain almost bare = until=20 >erosion had become a serious problem in some places. That following = winter,=20 >three starving does had wandered into the old man's yard, trying to eat = the=20 >bark off of his pecan trees, and he had wished the "animal rights" = fanatics=20 >could have been there then. It was against the law, but old man knew a=20 >higher law, and he took an axe into the yard and killed the starving=20 >beasts. They did not have the strength to run. >The buck finally turned and loped away, and they continued down the = trail=20 >to the river. When they came to the "Big Oak," the old man turned and=20 >pushed through the heavy brush beside the trail and the boy followed,=20 >wordlessly. The old man knew that Thomas was curious about their = leaving=20 >the trail, but the boy had learned to move silently (well, almost) and = that=20 >meant no talking. When they came to "Coffin Rock," the old man sat = down=20 >upon it and motioned for the boy to join him. >"You see this rock, shaped like a casket?" the old man asked. "Yes = sir."=20 >The old man smiled. The boy was respectful and polite. He loved the=20 >outdoors, too. Everything a man could ask in a grandson ....or a son. >"I want you to remember this place, and what I'm about to tell you. A = lot=20 >of it isn't going to make any sense to you, but it's important and one = day=20 >you'll understand it well enough. The old man paused. Now that he was = here,=20 >he didn't really know where to start. >"Before you were born," he began at last, "this country was different. = I've=20 >told you about hunting, about how everybody who obeyed the law could = own=20 >guns. A man could speak out, anywhere, without worrying about whether = he'd=20 >get back home or not. School was different, too. A man could send his = kids=20 >to a church school, or a private school, or even teach them at home. = But=20 >even in the public schools, they didn't spend all their time trying to=20 >brainwash you like they do at yours now." The old man paused, and was=20 >silent for many minutes. The boy was still, watching a chipmunk scavenging= =20 >beside a fallen tree below them. >"Things don't ever happen all at once, boy. They just sort of sneak up = on=20 >you. Sure, we knew guns were important; we just didn't think it would = ever=20 >happen in America. But we had to do something about crime, they said. = It=20 >was a crisis. Everything was a crisis! It was a drug crisis, or a = terrorism=20 >crisis, or street crime, or gang crime. Even a 'health care' crisis was = an=20 >excuse to take away a little more of our rights." The old man turned = to=20 >look at his grandson. >"They ever let you read a thing called the Constitution down there at = your=20 >school?" The boy solemnly shook his head. "Well, the Fourth Amendment's=20= >still in there. It says there won't be any unreasonable searches and=20 >seizures. It says you're safe in your own home." The old man shrugged.=20 >"That had to go. It was a crisis! They could kick your door open any = time,=20 >day or night, and come in with guns blazing if they thought you had = drugs=20 >...or later, guns. Oh, at first it was just registration-to keep the = guns=20 >out of the hands of criminals! But that didn't work, of course, and = then=20 >later when they wanted to take 'em they knew where to look. They = banned=20 >'assault rifles', and then 'sniper rifles', and 'Saturday night specials.'= =20 >Everything you saw on the TV or in the movies was against us. God knows = the=20 >news people were! And the schools were teaching our kids that nobody = needed=20 >guns anymore. We tried to take a stand, but we felt like the whole face = of=20 >our country had changed and we were left outside." >"Me and a friend of mine, when we saw what was happening, we came and = built=20 >a secret place up here on the mountain. A place where we could put our = guns=20 >until we needed them. We figured some day Americans would remember what = it=20 >was like to be free, and what kind of price we had to pay for that = freedom.=20 > So we hid our guns instead of losing them." > > >______________________________________________________________________ >To unsubscribe, write to membercouncil-unsubscribe@listbot.com >Start Your Own FREE Email List at http://www.listbot.com/ > > --=_AFF8ED2E.77167B7B-- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: [Fwd: Fw: [Fwd: A Miserable Scenario Part 2]] Date: 17 Dec 1998 17:48:17 -0700 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 22:14:40 -0700 Received: from mail.sisna.com by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id WAA22810; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 22:01:13 -0700 Message-Id: <199812170501.WAA22810@wvc> Received: from rserzen.sisna.com [209.210.178.101] by mail.sisna.com (SMTPD32-4.06) id A27BDF0120; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 22:11:23 MST Reply-To: "rserzen@sisna.com"@sisna.com Organization: Sunrise Medical X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-KIT (Win95; U) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Received: from mailhost.pioneer-net.com [206.58.81.4] by mail.sisna.com with ESMTP (SMTPD32-4.06) id AADB6D0021E; Tue, 15 Dec 1998 22:53:31 MST Received: from obsidian (rp28.pioneer-net.com [206.58.81.43]) by mailhost.pioneer-net.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id WAA32741 for ; Tue, 15 Dec 1998 22:59:31 -0800 Message-ID: <004401be28b8$6ffb8280$2b513ace@obsidian> X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=_CD9A8F4C.73127F7F" --=_CD9A8F4C.73127F7F Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline part 2 -----Original Message----- =20 > > --=_CD9A8F4C.73127F7F Content-Type: message/rfc822 Received: from mail.tignet.com ([199.231.128.3]) by mta2.mailsrvcs.net (InterMail v03.02.04 118 119) with ESMTP id <19981216004553.LPAZ815@mail.tignet.com> for ; Tue, 15 Dec 1998 18:45:53 -0600 Received: from ron.tampabay.rr.com (dt0d3nb3.tampabay.rr.com [24.92.171.179]) by mail.tignet.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id UAA03825 for ; Tue, 15 Dec 1998 20:44:49 -0500 Message-Id: <2.2.32.19981216004946.006b33dc@mail.tignet.com> X-Sender: atozstuff-atoz@mail.tignet.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline >Return-Path: >Mailing-List: ListBot mailing list contact membercouncil-help@listbot.com >Delivered-To: mailing list membercouncil@listbot.com >From: REBarnes50@aol.com >Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 09:35:38 EST >To: membercouncil@listbot.com >Subject: A Miserable Scenario Part 2 > >Member Council of Tampa Bay - http://home.tampabay.rr.com/membercouncil > >The following has been forwarded for your reading. I almost said "your >reading pleasure". It should push a lot of your buttons....Part 2 >Robert >Florida >=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 >"One fellow I knew disagreed. He said we ought to use our guns now and=20 >stand up to the government. Said that the colonists had fought for = their=20 >freedom when the British tried to disarm them at Lexington and Concord.=20= >Well, he and a lot of others died in what your history books call the = 'Tax=20 >Revolt of 2001,' but son, it wasn't the revolt that caused the repeal = of=20 >the Second Amendment like your history book says. The Second Amendment = was=20 >already gone long before they ever repealed it. The rest of us thought = we=20 >were doing the right thing by waiting. I hope to God we were right." >"You see, Thomas. It isn't government that makes a man free. In the = end,=20 >governments always do just the opposite. They gobble up freedom like = hungry=20 >pigs. You have to have laws to keep the worst in men under control, but = at=20 >the same time the people have to have guns, too, in order to keep the=20 >government itself under control. In our country, the people were = supposed=20 >to be the final authority of the law, but that was a long time ago. = Once=20 >the guns were gone, there was no reason for those who run the government = to=20 >give a damn about laws and constitutional rights and such. They just = did=20 >what they pleased and anyone who spoke out...well, I'm getting ahead = of=20 >myself." >"It took a long time to collect up all the millions of firearms that = were=20 >in private hands. The government created a whole new agency to see to = it.=20 >There were rewards for turning your friends in, too. Drug dealers and=20 >murderers were set free after two or three years in prison, but possession= =20 >of a gun would get you mandatory life behind bars with no parole. >"I don't know how they found out about me, probably knew I'd been a = hunter=20 >all those years, or maybe somebody turned me in. They picked me up on=20 >suspicion and took me down to the federal building." >"Son, those guys did everything they could think of to me. Kept me = locked=20 >up in this little room for hours, no food, no water. They kept coming = in,=20 >asking me where the guns were. 'What guns?' I said. Whenever I'd doze = off,=20 >they'd come crashing in, yelling and hollering. I got to where I = didn't=20 >know which end was up. I'd say I wanted my lawyer and they'd laugh.=20 >'Lawyers are for criminals', they said. 'You'll get a lawyer after we = get=20 >the guns.' What's so funny is, I know they thought they were doing the=20 >right thing. >They were fighting crime!" >"When I got home I found Ruth sitting in the middle of the living room=20 >floor, crying her eyes out. The house was a shambles. While I was down=20 >there, they'd come out and took our house apart. Didn't need a search=20 >warrant, they said. National emergency! Gun crisis! Your grandma tried = to=20 >call our preacher and they ripped the phone off the wall. Told her = that=20 >they'd go easy on me if she just told them where I kept my guns." The = old=20 >man laughed. "She told them to go to hell." He stared into the distance = for=20 >a moment as his laughter faded. >"They wouldn't tell her about me, where I was or anything, that whole = time.=20 > She said that she'd thought I was dead. She never got over that day, = and=20 >she died the next December." >"They've been watching me ever since, off and on. I guess there's not = much=20 >for them to do anymore, now that all the guns are gone. Plenty of time = to=20 >watch one foolish old man." He paused. Beside him, the boy stared at = the=20 >stone beneath his feet. >"Anyway, I figure that, one day, America will come to her senses. Our = men=20 >will need those guns and they'll be ready. We cleaned them and sealed = them=20 >up good; they'll last for years. Maybe it won't be in your lifetime,=20 >Thomas. Maybe one day you'll be sitting here with your son or = grandson.=20 >Tell him about me, boy. Tell him about the way I said America used to = be."=20 >The old man stood, his bad leg shaking unsteadily beneath him. >"You see the way this stone points? You follow that line one hundred = feet=20 >down the hill and you'll find a big round rock. It looks like it's = buried=20 >solid, but one man with a good prybar can lift it, and there's a = concrete=20 >tunnel right under there that goes back into the hill." >The old man stood, watching as the sun eased toward the ridge, coloring = the=20 >sky and the world red. Below them, the river still splashed among the=20 >stones, as it had for a million years. It's still going, the old man=20 >thought. There'll be someone left to carry on for me when I'm gone. It = was=20 >harder to walk back. He felt old and purposeless now, and it would be=20 >easier, he knew, to give in to that aching heaviness in his left lung = that=20 >had begun to trouble him more and more. Damn cigarettes, he thought. = His=20 >leg hurt, and the boy silently came up beside him and supported him as = they=20 >started down the last mile toward the house. How quiet he walks, the = old=20 >man thought. He's learned well. >It was almost dark when the boy walked in. His father looked up from = his=20 >paper. "Did you and your granddad have a nice walk?" >"Yes," the boy answered, opening the refrigerator. "You can call Agent=20 >Goodwin tomorrow. Gramps finally showed me where it is." > > >Editor's note: "Sundown at Coffin Rock" is a work of fiction. Any=20 >similarity >to actual events or to actual people, living or dead, remains to be seen. = - >Mark Pixler, Editor > > >______________________________________________________________________ >To unsubscribe, write to membercouncil-unsubscribe@listbot.com >Start Your Own FREE Email List at http://www.listbot.com/ > > --=_CD9A8F4C.73127F7F-- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: Impeachment Date: 21 Dec 1998 08:58:57 -0700 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Sun, 20 Dec 1998 14:17:13 -0700 Received: from kendaco.telebyte.com by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id OAA26609; Sun, 20 Dec 1998 14:03:39 -0700 Received: (from mail@localhost) by kendaco.telebyte.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) id NAA23954; Sun, 20 Dec 1998 13:15:00 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: kendaco.telebyte.com: mail set sender to NRA-ILA-EVC-owner@kendaco.telebyte.com using -f Received: from pop02.globecomm.net (pop02.globecomm.net [206.253.129.186]) by kendaco.telebyte.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA23951 for ; Sun, 20 Dec 1998 13:14:59 -0800 Received: from default (tam-fl6-07.ix.netcom.com [199.183.198.199]) by pop02.globecomm.net (8.9.0/8.8.0) with SMTP id QAA07356; Sun, 20 Dec 1998 16:14:28 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000d01be2c5d$c3bee1c0$c7c6b7c7@default> "membercouncil" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1250" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: NRA-ILA-EVC@kendaco.telebyte.com Sender: NRA-ILA-EVC-owner@kendaco.telebyte.com Precedence: list If you would like to have a say on Impeachment, take a brief stop and vote at: http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/20/impeach.opeds/index.html Let's all have a say on the subject. Chuck Hoskinson FL-11 ****Owning a firearm is a RIGHT, not a privilege**** The NRA ILA EVC closed mailing list is NOT an official list of the NRA, but is offered as a tool by Jim Kendall (WA-1st District EVC) and Telebyte NW. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send an email request to NRA-1st@telebyte.com *********** Victory 1998! *************** - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: "The Day Democracy Died" Date: 22 Dec 1998 08:11:10 -0700 Received: from dfw-ix1.ix.netcom.com ([206.214.98.1]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Mon, 21 Dec 1998 18:48:24 -0700 Received: (from smap@localhost) by dfw-ix1.ix.netcom.com (8.8.4/8.8.4) id TAA09527; Mon, 21 Dec 1998 19:45:48 -0600 (CST) Received: from jac-fl3-21.ix.netcom.com(204.31.245.117) by dfw-ix1.ix.netcom.com via smap (V1.3) id rma009487; Mon Dec 21 19:45:12 1998 Message-ID: <367EFB07.99CB9EA3@ix.netcom.com> Reply-To: gatorjag@ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; U) James Wheat , Jay Meyer , Pat Glenn Morningstar , David Sagers Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Forwarded by a friend. A sad statement for us all: The Day Democracy Died by Tom Hewes, Col. USMC ( ret.) Democracy got sick the day the President of the United States, William Jefferson Clinton, decided he was more important than the principles embodied in the Constitution. That was the day he chose to lie in a civil deposition in the Paula Jones case rather than tell the truth as required by his oath of office. That was the day he first used the machinery of his office to suborn perjury. Democracy developed a fever the day the President turned the spin doctors, Carville, Blumenthal, and Lewis, loose on the body politic with the lie that a vast right wing conspiracy, abetted by a hostile media, were out to destroy him. That was also the day he knowingly lied to his aides and his cabinet, and then sent them forth to spread the lie. Democracy was placed on the serious list the day the President looked us all in the eye and said, "I did not have sex with that woman." That was the day he and his "flackeys" claimed our constitutional doctor, Independent Counsel Starr, was guilty of malpractice. Democracy writhed in pain the day the Democrat party decided that party was more important than principle. That was the day the radical feminists prostituted themselves to stay in bed with the President. That was also the day the media found the patient's ratings were down, and abandoned her cause. Democracy screamed in agony the day it discovered that her medical chart was being filled out with results of a poll taken among a mere one thousand carefully selected people. That was the day most Americans decided they didn't want to hear any more about illness in the body politic. Democracy's condition further worsened the day the sixteen Democrat members of the House Judiciary Committee savaged the Independent Counsel rather than determine the validity of the charges against the President. That was the day African -Americans ironically decided that access to power was more important than the rule of law. Democracy slipped onto the critical list the day the Congress of the United States ruled that lying under oath is acceptable behavior for the highest Law enforcement officer in the land. That was the day the President of the United States became a law unto himself. Democracy died the day she found out that the majority of Americans were too ignorant, too busy, or too bored to care whether she lived or died. That was the same day the first American Caesar was born. Where were you the day democracy died? - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: L&J: The ACLU on Gun Control Date: 22 Dec 1998 14:30:12 -0700 Received: from cor.oz.cc.utah.edu ([155.99.2.2]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Tue, 22 Dec 1998 13:56:07 -0700 Received: from localhost (shb4391@localhost) by cor.oz.cc.utah.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA24477 for ; Tue, 22 Dec 1998 13:54:04 -0700 (MST) X-Received: from locke.adm.by.net (mail@locke.adm.by.net [209.195.180.3]) by gos.oz.cc.utah.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA03903 for ; Tue, 22 Dec 1998 13:03:36 -0700 (MST) X-Received: from majordom by locke.adm.by.net with local (Exim 2.05 #1) id 0zsXUz-0002fD-00 (Debian); Tue, 22 Dec 1998 14:29:41 -0500 X-Received: from centurion.flash.net [209.30.0.22] by locke.adm.by.net with esmtp (Exim 2.05 #1) id 0zsXUy-0002f8-00 (Debian); Tue, 22 Dec 1998 14:29:40 -0500 X-Received: from mailgw.flash.net (deimos.flash.net [209.30.0.43]) by centurion.flash.net (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA05039 for ; Tue, 22 Dec 1998 13:29:37 -0600 (CST) X-Received: from echo.flash.net (echo.flash.net [209.30.0.40]) by mailgw.flash.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA20518 for ; Tue, 22 Dec 1998 13:29:37 -0600 (CST) X-Received: from ot_55 ([207.252.26.3]) by echo.flash.net (8.9.1/8.8.5) with SMTP id NAA10182 for ; Tue, 22 Dec 1998 13:29:15 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <367FF29F.7FC5@flash.net> Reply-To: msmith01@flash.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04 (WinNT; I) Sender: owner-liberty-and-justice@mailbox.by.net Precedence: list ReSent-Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 13:53:58 -0700 (MST) ReSent-From: Scott Bergeson ReSent-To: David Sagers ReSent-Subject: L&J: The ACLU on Gun Control ReSent-Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=_4B1CF09A.3E5F323C" --=_4B1CF09A.3E5F323C Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline http://www.aclu.org/library/aaguns.html --=_4B1CF09A.3E5F323C Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="aaguns.html" [Image] Gun Control "Why doesn't the ACLU support an individual's unlimited right to keep and bear arms?" BACKGROUND The ACLU has often been criticized for "ignoring the Second Amendment" and refusing to fight for the individual's right to own a gun or other weapons. This issue, however, has not been ignored by the ACLU. The national board has in fact debated and discussed the civil liberties aspects of the Second Amendment many times. We believe that the constitutional right to bear arms is primarily a collective one, intended mainly to protect the right of the states to maintain militias to assure their own freedom and security against the central government. In today's world, that idea is somewhat anachronistic and in any case would require weapons much more powerful than handguns or hunting rifles. The ACLU therefore believes that the Second Amendment does not confer an unlimited right upon individuals to own guns or other weapons nor does it prohibit reasonable regulation of gun ownership, such as licensing and registration. IN BRIEF The national ACLU is neutral on the issue of gun control. We believe that the Constitution contains no barriers to reasonable regulations of gun ownership. If we can license and register cars, we can license and register guns. Most opponents of gun control concede that the Second Amendment certainly does not guarantee an individual's right to own bazookas, missiles or nuclear warheads. Yet these, like rifles, pistols and even submachine guns, are arms. The question therefore is not whether to restrict arms ownership, but how much to restrict it. If that is a question left open by the Constitution, then it is a question for Congress to decide. ACLU POLICY "The ACLU agrees with the Supreme Court's long-standing interpretation of the Second Amendment [as set forth in the 1939 case, U.S. v. Miller] that the individual's right to bear arms applies only to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia. Except for lawful police and military purposes, the possession of weapons by individuals is not constitutionally protected. Therefore, there is no constitutional impediment to the regulation of firearms." --Policy #47 ARGUMENTS, FACTS, QUOTES "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." The Second Amendment to the Constitution "Since the Second Amendment. . . applies only to the right of the State to maintain a militia and not to the individual's right to bear arms, there can be no serious claim to any express constitutional right to possess a firearm." U.S. v. Warin (6th Circuit, 1976) Unless the Constitution protects the individual's right to own all kinds of arms, there is no principled way to oppose reasonable restrictions on handguns, Uzis or semi-automatic rifles. If indeed the Second Amendment provides an absolute, constitutional protection for the right to bear arms in order to preserve the power of the people to resist government tyranny, then it must allow individuals to possess bazookas, torpedoes, SCUD missiles and even nuclear warheads, for they, like handguns, rifles and M-16s, are arms. Moreover, it is hard to imagine any serious resistance to the military without such arms. Yet few, if any, would argue that the Second Amendment gives individuals the unlimited right to own any weapons they please. But as soon as we allow governmental regulation of any weapons, we have broken the dam of Constitutional protection. Once that dam is broken, we are not talking about whether the government can constitutionally restrict arms, but rather what constitutes a reasonable restriction. The 1939 case U.S. v. Miller is the only modern case in which the Supreme Court has addressed this issue. A unanimous Court ruled that the Second Amendment must be interpreted as intending to guarantee the states' rights to maintain and train a militia. "In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a shotgun having a barrel of less than 18 inches in length at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument," the Court said. In subsequent years, the Court has refused to address the issue. It routinely denies cert. to almost all Second Amendment cases. In 1983, for example, it let stand a 7th Circuit decision upholding an ordinance in Morton Grove, Illinois, which banned possession of handguns within its borders. The case, Quilici v. Morton Grove 695 F.2d 261 (7th Cir. 1982), cert. denied 464 U.S. 863 (1983), is considered by many to be the most important modern gun control case. [Image] Copyright 1996, The American Civil Liberties Union --=_4B1CF09A.3E5F323C-- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "S. Thompson" Subject: STOP BATF INTIMIDATION Date: 22 Dec 1998 20:15:22 -0700 STOP BATF INTIMIDATION The follwing leter was delivered to a lawabiding firearms owner by the BATF. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO AND FIREARMS WASHINGTON, D.C. 20226 NOTICE OF UNLICENSED FIREARMS DEALING VIOLATION Recently, your participation in the transfer of firearms has come to the attention of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF). ATF is charged with the responsibility of enforcing the Federal firearms laws and, as part of that duty, we must license persons lawfully dealing in firearms as well as prevent unlicensed dealing. We seek the cooperative efforts of the general public in fulfilling this mandate. Your firearms activity may bring you within the definition of a dealer in firearms as defined by the Gun Control Act of 1968, as amended. This definition (18 U.S.C. section 921 (a) (21) (c)) includes =93a person who devotes time, attention and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of Firearms . . .=94 To willfully deal in firearms without a license issued by AFT would place you in violation of 18 U.S.C. section 922(a)(1)(A). A sentence of not more than 5 years=92 imprisonment and/or a $5,000 fine may be imposed on anyone found guilty of dealing in firearms without a license. Attached to this notice is an ATF F 7, Application for License Under 18 U.S.C. Chapter 44, Firearms. If you conduct firearms activities on a scale that would bring you within the scope of the above definition of a =93dealer,=94 then you need to apply for a Federal firearms license. Please feel free to contact the nearest ATF office for assistance. Sincerely yours R. W. Haynes Special Agent in Charge Served By: (signature unreadable) Date: Location: I acknowledge receipt of this notice. (Blacked out) Date: The following suggested reply to this attempt to intimidate you is written by Past Second Vice President of NRA Albert C. Ross. Special Agent, ATF Department of Treasury Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms Washington, D.C. 20226 Dear _________: I wish to acknowledge the letter recently delivered to me by Special Agent (name) on (date) at (location). In your letter you advised that my alleged firearms activity may bring me within the definition of a dealer in firearms as defined by the Gun Control Act of 1968, as amended. You stated that this definition as set out in 18 U.S.C. section 922 (a)(21)(c) includes =93a person who devotes time, attention and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms. . .=94 . First, I wish to state that it has never been my intention to violate any state or federal law or ever remotely engage in conduct that could be interpreted as such. Also, it has been my understanding that a Federal Firearms License was not available to people who are engaging in a hobby (such as me) or who desire to operate out of their home (also such as me) due to the ill-advised restrictions as to city zoning issues even when these issues are of no concern to the city. I therefore, would ask for clarification of some of the items in your recent letter. These questions are asked in order that I might keep my activities within the bounds of lawful conduct as well as to continue the exercise of my lawful rights as a United States citizen. My questions are as follows: (1) You stated that 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(21)(c) =93includes . . .=94 Are there other definitions within the United States Code in addition to 18 U. S. C. Section 921(a)(21)(c) that define =93a dealer in firearms=94? If so, what are they? (2) The subject definition refers to a person who, =93devotes time, attention and labor. . .=94 Have there been judicial interpretations or does the ATF have a regulation or policy as to what constitutes the devotion of =93time,=94 =93attention=94 or =93lab= or=94 as used herein? How much time devoted to firearms transactions vs. What else I do on a daily or weekly basis? Also, what is meant by =93labor?=94 Is that my personal labor or volunteer labor of friends who assist me or labor I hire and pay for? (3) The quoted section of the United States Code defines who may be a =93dealer=94 in firearms and then used the term of =93dealing=94 in firearms within the definition. Have there been judicial interpretations or does the ATF have a regulation or policy as to what constitutes =93dealing=94 in firearms? Is this based on the number of firearms sold or traded within a given time? If so what is applicable here? (4) Is there a judicial interpretation or ATF regulation that defines what is =93a regular course of trade or business=94 as used in the United States Code definition? If so, what are the citations or ATF regulations? (5) Is there a judicial interpretation or ATF regulation that defines =93principal objective=94 as used in the United States Code definition? If so, what are the citations or ATF regulations? In my particular case, I would submit that my =93principal objective=94 is to engage in social intercourse with my friends and other people with a common interest in firearms. It seems incredible to me that this activity would be unlawful. (6) Are there judicial interpretations or ATF regulations that define =93livelihood and profit=94 as used in the subject United States Code section? If so, what are the citations or the ATF regulations? Is there any ATF policy that separates =93livelihood=94 from =93profit=94 as used in the United States Code section? Also, does the term =93profit=94 take into consideration the time, transportation costs, and other expenses that would be chargeable to a firearms =93business=94 when determining whether a =93profit=94 has been made? Who has the burden of proof on this point, the ATF to show that a =93profit and livelihood=94 was being made, or me to show that such was not the case? Are there any court cases that clarify this issue? In my particular case, I certainly am not earning my =93livelihood=94 from ant firearm sales, nor am I making any =93profit=94 from any such sales if you take into consideration the normal costs and expenses of overhead along with a reasonable charge for my personal time devoted to the activity. Does my failure to earn a =93livelihood and profit=94 exempt me from the provisions of 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(21)(c)? (7) Finally, the last paragraph of your letter advised that if =93you conduct firearms activities on a scale. . . . =93 What =93scale=94 is being referred to here? I would appreciate clarification as to just what =93scale=94 would bring me =93within the scope of the above definition.=94 I would respectfully ask for answers to these questions so that I may faithfully comply with the laws and regulations you cited. Also, I would ask that you consider this letter as a request under either the Open Records Act or Freedom of Information Request for information relating to all cases or prosecutions initiated by the ATF charging anyone with a violation of 18U.S.C. section 921(a)(21)(c) or 18U.S.C. section 922(a)(1)(A) as of the date of this letter. Sincerely yours, (should be sent certified mail) You should keep a copy of all correspondence and send copies to your pro-firearms organizations NRA, GOA, CCRKBA, SAF, Firearms Hardcore, ect. and your Congressman and US Senators. You are also requested to vote for Albert C. Ross for the NRA Board of directors elections and his friends all of whom are running under the Second Amendment Action slate. See the following web sites. www.2ndamendment.net www.nealknox.com/ SECOND AMENDMENT ACTION - Candidates for NRA Board Michael J. Beko Sally Drews Brodbeck William Dominguez Howard J. Fezell Dr. Daniel B. Fiora David M. Gross Fred E. Gustafson Robert E. Hodgdon Michael S. Kindberg Albert C. Ross Frank H. Sawberger Thomas L. Seefeldt John H. Trentes Glen I. Voorhees Please feel free to forward this information to all your friends. Thanks. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: STOP BATF INTIMIDATION Date: 23 Dec 1998 09:15:15 -0700 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Tue, 22 Dec 1998 19:07:14 -0700 Received: from listbox.com by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id SAA29127; Tue, 22 Dec 1998 18:53:36 -0700 Received: (qmail 13698 invoked by uid 516); 23 Dec 1998 02:04:29 -0000 Delivered-To: rkba-co@majordomo.pobox.com Received: (qmail 13337 invoked from network); 23 Dec 1998 02:03:45 -0000 Received: from pm06sm.pmm.cw.net (208.159.126.155) by majordomo.pobox.com with SMTP; 23 Dec 1998 02:03:45 -0000 Received: from hawk (usr3-dialup59.mix2.Atlanta.cw.net [166.55.51.187]) by PM06SM.PMM.CW.NET (PMDF V5.2-29 #33510) with SMTP id <0F4E00H4KA3L5E@PM06SM.PMM.CW.NET>; Wed, 23 Dec 1998 02:01:01 +0000 (GMT) Message-id: <000e01be2e17$b4f2f760$bb3337a6@hawk> X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.0810.800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.0810.800 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal 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=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Posted to rkba-co by Weldon Clark ----------------------- STOP BATF INTIMIDATION The follwing leter was delivered to a lawabiding firearms owner by the BATF. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO AND FIREARMS WASHINGTON, D.C. 20226 NOTICE OF UNLICENSED FIREARMS DEALING VIOLATION Recently, your participation in the transfer of firearms has come to the attention of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF). ATF is charged with the responsibility of enforcing the Federal firearms laws and, as part of that duty, we must license persons lawfully dealing in firearms as well as prevent unlicensed dealing. We seek the cooperative efforts of the general public in fulfilling this mandate. Your firearms activity may bring you within the definition of a dealer in firearms as defined by the Gun Control Act of 1968, as amended. This definition (18 U.S.C. section 921 (a) (21) (c)) includes =F4a person who devotes time, attention and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of Firearms . . .=F6 To willfully deal in firearms without a license issued by AFT would place you in violation of 18 U.S.C. section 922(a)(1)(A). A sentence of not more than 5 years=C6 imprisonment and/or a $5,000 fine may be imposed on anyone found guilty of dealing in firearms without a license. Attached to this notice is an ATF F 7, Application for License Under 18 U.S.C. Chapter 44, Firearms. If you conduct firearms activities on a scale that would bring you within the scope of the above definition of a =F4dealer,=F6 then you need to apply for a Federal firearms license. Please feel free to contact the nearest ATF office for assistance. Sincerely yours R. W. Haynes Special Agent in Charge Served By: (signature unreadable) Date: Location: I acknowledge receipt of this notice. (Blacked out) Date: The following suggested reply to this attempt to intimidate you is written by Past Second Vice President of NRA Albert C. Ross. Special Agent, ATF Department of Treasury Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms Washington, D.C. 20226 Dear _________: I wish to acknowledge the letter recently delivered to me by Special Agent (name) on (date) at (location). In your letter you advised that my alleged firearms activity may bring me within the definition of a dealer in firearms as defined by the Gun Control Act of 1968, as amended. You stated that this definition as set out in 18 U.S.C. section 922 (a)(21)(c) includes =F4a person who devotes time, attention and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms. . .=F6 . First, I wish to state that it has never been my intention to violate any state or federal law or ever remotely engage in conduct that could be interpreted as such. Also, it has been my understanding that a Federal Firearms License was not available to people who are engaging in a hobby (such as me) or who desire to operate out of their home (also such as me) due to the ill-advised restrictions as to city zoning issues even when these issues are of no concern to the city. I therefore, would ask for clarification of some of the items in your recent letter. These questions are asked in order that I might keep my activities within the bounds of lawful conduct as well as to continue the exercise of my lawful rights as a United States citizen. My questions are as follows: (1) You stated that 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(21)(c) =F4includes . . .=F6 Are there other definitions within the United States Code in addition to 18 U. S. C. Section 921(a)(21)(c) that define =F4a dealer in firearms=F6? If so, what are they? (2) The subject definition refers to a person who, =F4devotes time, attention and labor. . .=F6 Have there been judicial interpretations or does the ATF have a regulation or policy as to what constitutes the devotion of =F4time,=F6 =F4attention=F6 or = =F4labor=F6 as used herein? How much time devoted to firearms transactions vs. What else I do on a daily or weekly basis? Also, what is meant by =F4labor?=F6 Is that my personal labor or volunteer labor of friends who assist me or labor I hire and pay for? (3) The quoted section of the United States Code defines who may be a =F4dealer=F6 in firearms and then used the term of =F4dealing=F6 in firearms within the definition. Have there been judicial interpretations or does the ATF have a regulation or policy as to what constitutes =F4dealing=F6 in firearms? Is this based on the number of firearms sold or traded within a given time? If so what is applicable here? (4) Is there a judicial interpretation or ATF regulation that defines what is =F4a regular course of trade or business=F6 as used in the United States Code definition? If so, what are the citations or ATF regulations? (5) Is there a judicial interpretation or ATF regulation that defines =F4principal objective=F6 as used in the United States Code definition? If so, what are the citations or ATF regulations? In my particular case, I would submit that my =F4principal objective=F6 is to engage in social intercourse with my friends and other people with a common interest in firearms. It seems incredible to me that this activity would be unlawful. (6) Are there judicial interpretations or ATF regulations that define =F4livelihood and profit=F6 as used in the subject United States Code section? If so, what are the citations or the ATF regulations? Is there any ATF policy that separates =F4livelihood=F6 from =F4profit=F6 as used in the United States Code section? Also, does the term =F4profit=F6 take into consideration the time, transportation costs, and other expenses that would be chargeable to a firearms =F4business=F6 when determining whether a =F4profit=F6 has been made? Who has the burden of proof on this point, the ATF to show that a =F4profit and livelihood=F6 was being made, or me to show that such was not the case? Are there any court cases that clarify this issue? In my particular case, I certainly am not earning my =F4livelihood=F6 from ant firearm sales, nor am I making any =F4profit=F6 from any such sales if you take into consideration the normal costs and expenses of overhead along with a reasonable charge for my personal time devoted to the activity. Does my failure to earn a =F4livelihood and profit=F6 exempt me from the provisions of 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(21)(c)? (7) Finally, the last paragraph of your letter advised that if =F4you conduct firearms activities on a scale. . . . =F4 What =F4scale=F6 is being referred to here? I would appreciate clarification as to just what =F4scale=F6 would bring me =F4within the scope of the above definition.=F6 I would respectfully ask for answers to these questions so that I may faithfully comply with the laws and regulations you cited. Also, I would ask that you consider this letter as a request under either the Open Records Act or Freedom of Information Request for information relating to all cases or prosecutions initiated by the ATF charging anyone with a violation of 18U.S.C. section 921(a)(21)(c) or 18U.S.C. section 922(a)(1)(A) as of the date of this letter. Sincerely yours, (should be sent certified mail) You should keep a copy of all correspondence and send copies to your pro-firearms organizations NRA, GOA, CCRKBA, SAF, Firearms Hardcore, ect. and your Congressman and US Senators. You are also requested to vote for Albert C. Ross for the NRA Board of directors elections and his friends all of whom are running under the Second Amendment Action slate. See the following web sites. www.2ndamendment.net www.nealknox.com/ SECOND AMENDMENT ACTION - Candidates for NRA Board Michael J. Beko Sally Drews Brodbeck William Dominguez Howard J. Fezell Dr. Daniel B. Fiora David M. Gross Fred E. Gustafson Robert E. Hodgdon Michael S. Kindberg Albert C. Ross Frank H. Sawberger Thomas L. Seefeldt John H. Trentes Glen I. Voorhees Please feel free to forward this information to all your friends. Thanks. 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: OKC & Clinton Re-Election Date: 23 Dec 1998 11:11:03 -0700 New Morris Book Portrays How Polls, Clinton Policy Intersected=20 By John F. Harris Washington Post Staff Writer Tuesday, December 22, 1998; Page A18=20 Once a week, every Wednesday night, the group huddled in the Yellow Oval = Room of the White House residence. The discussion grazed across an = ever-changing buffet of subjects high and low: welfare and immigration, = O.J. Simpson and Paula Jones.=20 But the real agenda was always centered on the man sitting at the center = in a large stuffed chair: President Clinton and his plans for winning a = second term.=20 The group of political consultants and senior White House staff, joined by = Vice President Gore and a handful of Cabinet members, was essentially the = war council for the 1996 campaign. Two years later, a window has opened on = that campaign and the techniques of its erratic chief strategist Dick = Morris, thanks to a new book by Morris that reprints 18 months of the = agendas he produced for the weekly strategy sessions.=20 The agendas reflect Morris's polling-based approach to politics and = suggest the degree to which Clinton's policy initiatives on such subjects = as crime, immigration and welfare were influenced by public opinion = surveys and other political judgments about how best to position the = president against the Republicans.=20 The documents also reveal how Clinton's advisers weighed the political = implications of even the most tragic events, and assessed ways in which he = might gain side benefits from his presidential duties.=20 On April 27, 1995 -- eight days after the Oklahoma City bombing -- Morris = directed a discussion of how to reap political advantage from the = aftermath, according to the agenda for the date. As the consultant saw it, = Clinton's handling of the tragedy would lead to "temporary gain: boost in = ratings," and how he could create "a permanent possible gain: sets up = Extremist Issue vs. Republicans."=20 On Aug. 1, 1996, among topics at the weekly meeting was how well Clinton = had responded to the mid-air explosion of TWA Flight 800. Polling data = showed that 84 percent of Americans had heard about Clinton's meeting with = families of the victims. Fifty percent said the emotional meeting made = them more likely to vote for Clinton over Robert J. Dole.=20 The agendas are printed as an appendix to a newly released edition of = "Behind the Oval Office," the campaign memoir that Morris published early = last year. Two years after the election, the agendas -- which were once so = sensitive that Gore had to return his copy at the end of each session -- = are noteworthy now primarily as historical documents.=20 They also highlight an irony that echoes through Clinton's presidency to = this day. At the very time that he was working so methodically to rebuild = his presidency -- polling on every event or issue that might conceivably = affect his prospects -- he was carrying on a relationship with Monica S. = Lewinsky that would later help opponents tear him down.=20 Senior White House officials said yesterday they had not reviewed Morris's = new book but said they had no reason to suspect that the agendas he = printed were not authentic. They cautioned, however, that the agendas that = Morris presented at the weekly political meetings -- before he left the = campaign in August 1996 -- often reflected his own interests and obsessions= more than Clinton's.=20 Even Morris, who said he published the agendas because they were "historica= l documents," emphasized: "I'm the author of the agendas, not Clinton."=20 Yet reading through the 200 pages of agendas -- and comparing them to = Clinton's schedule and statements in 1995 and 1996 -- make clear that = politics and policy became fused in Clinton's White House to a greater = degree than had been demonstrated.=20 On April 24, 1996, polling data presented at the weekly meeting showed = that an initiative to crack down on "deadbeat dads" who don't pay child = support would make 80 percent of respondents more likely to vote for = Clinton. Later that spring, he announced new regulations requiring states = to take more aggressive steps to track down fathers.=20 On June 12, consultants presented data showing that 87 percent of the = electorate favored a constitutional amendment guaranteeing new rights to = crime victims. Two weeks later, Clinton, surrounded by parents of slain = children, overruled recommendations of some constitutional experts in the = Justice Department and endorsed an amendment. He has rarely mentioned the = idea since 1996.=20 Clinton also looked closely at polls the next month in deciding to sign = what he called a flawed bill to overhaul welfare. Morris warned him that a = veto -- as strongly urged by Health and Human Services Secretary Donna E. = Shalala -- "would be a disaster" that would cause him to lose 8 percentage = points against Dole.=20 While the agendas Morris reprints may buttress those who believe Clinton = is a finger-in-the-wind politician, Morris in an interview yesterday said = the perception is unfair. Clinton may poll more than other presidents, he = said, but he has proven himself willing to take actions that go against = public opinion -- such as approving a U.S.-led financial rescue of Mexico = or sending U.S. troops to Bosnia. It is when he is taking unpopular steps, = Morris said, that Clinton examines polls most minutely to figure out the = best way to make a hard sale.=20 Numerous White House aides groaned or sputtered expletives when informed = about the new book by Morris. The consultant, who has worked with numerous = Republicans, was a despised figure among many Clinton aides even before he = was fired for consorting with a prostitute.=20 But even some aides who disdain Morris acknowledge that, over the years, = he has been far closer to Clinton than any other adviser. Especially in = times of crisis in his career -- after a defeat in Arkansas, after the = 1994 elections, and after the Lewinsky story broke in January -- Clinton = has turned to his old adviser.=20 The agendas reflect a continuing concern of the president -- maintaining = his popularity amid news of scandal. The team polled extensively on such = controversies as the White House's improper possession of FBI files, which = was hurting his numbers for a time in June 1996, and whether Clinton was = being hurt by the Paula Jones sexual harassment case. In the end, though, = the numbers always showed that people's support of Clinton's policies = overcame mistrust of him personally.=20 But the agendas also hint at a controversy to come: Morris urged extensive = Democratic National Committee issue advertising. "Use DNC to pay for it; = we control production," the consultant wrote on the agenda for June 26, = 1995.=20 The agendas show how much Clinton and his team worried about news events = that would seem, at first glance, unrelated to presidential politics. On = Oct. 3, 1995, in the wake of the O.J. Simpson verdict, Clinton's polling = team of Mark Penn and Doug Schoen surveyed the public about how whites and = blacks would react. Morris said Clinton was concerned about a possible = "right-wing backlash" after an acquittal.=20 On May 9, 1996, Clinton's political team discussed how to use that year's = Summer Olympics in Atlanta to the president's advantage -- amplifying his = message about "responsibility and self-improvement." For the 1996 = Democratic convention, the Clinton team polled on such possible speakers = as Walter Cronkite, Garth Brooks and John F. Kennedy Jr. before deciding = on Christopher Reeve.=20 The agendas also reflect the Clinton team's belief in sending messages = about cultural values. On Oct. 11, 1995, the agenda for the weekly meeting = was about how Clinton could recast his style to present more of a = reassuring "father image" -- in part to draw more female votes.=20 "Women crave men who act responsibly," Morris wrote. "Romance novel themes = are now of woman done wrong and rescued by Mr. Right."=20 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: L&J: CNN: AN EXAMPLE OF RIGGING THE "CALL IN" POLLS! Date: 29 Dec 1998 10:57:04 -0700 Received: from cor.oz.cc.utah.edu ([155.99.2.2]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Tue, 29 Dec 1998 10:29:36 -0700 Received: from localhost (shb4391@localhost) by cor.oz.cc.utah.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA19734 for ; Tue, 29 Dec 1998 10:27:23 -0700 (MST) X-Received: from locke.adm.by.net (mail@locke.adm.by.net [209.195.180.3]) by gos.oz.cc.utah.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA01979 for ; Tue, 29 Dec 1998 10:19:51 -0700 (MST) X-Received: from majordom by locke.adm.by.net with local (Exim 2.05 #1) id 0zv1xj-0000Jh-00 (Debian); Tue, 29 Dec 1998 11:25:39 -0500 X-Received: from db1.cc.rochester.edu [128.151.233.1] by locke.adm.by.net with esmtp (Exim 2.05 #1) id 0zv1xh-0000Jc-00 (Debian); Tue, 29 Dec 1998 11:25:38 -0500 X-Received: from lysander.english.rochester.edu (eng1.english.rochester.edu) by DBV (PMDF V5.1-12 #28447) with SMTP id <01J5WPGF59KG9YCHW2@DBV> for Liberty-and-Justice@mailbox.by.NET; Tue, 29 Dec 1998 11:22:09 EDT X-Sender: pnpj@db7.cc.rochester.edu Message-id: <2.2.32.19981229162252.00705968@db7.cc.rochester.edu> X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Sender: owner-liberty-and-justice@mailbox.by.net Precedence: list ReSent-Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 10:27:17 -0700 (MST) ReSent-From: Scott Bergeson ReSent-To: David Sagers ReSent-Subject: L&J: CNN: AN EXAMPLE OF RIGGING THE "CALL IN" POLLS! ReSent-Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Ah, yes. The polls. Anyone who believes in polls has an obvious Reality Perception Problem (RPP), a disease swiftly becoming more pervasive and dangerous by the minute. Thank goodness the people who suffer from this disease the most are media people and politicians. It will be their = downfall. Patty Area: 10TH_AMD (10th Amendment Fidonet Conference) - ------------ Date : Dec 28 '98, 03:34 Dir >From : Roy J. Tellason 1:270/615.0 To : all =20 Subj : and the survey said... = =20 - ------------ * Forwarded (from: TECH-CHAT) by Roy J. Tellason using timEd 1.01. * Originally from Matt Mc_Carthy (1:396/1.4) to All. * Original dated: Dec 27 '98, 16:40 Here's something I received in Email: The following is quoted verbatim from "letters to the editor", Tampa Tribune, December 27,1998 -+-------------------------------------------------------------------------= - ----------------- CNN aired the impeachment hearings last Saturday. The TV screen flashed two telephone numbers. If you were against impeachment, the number to dial was (202) 624-1115. If you were in favor of impeachment the number was (202) 624-1111. I was for impeachment. I dialed the "1111" number every minute for two hours and 15 minutes and never got through. The response was one ring followed by a recorded message "all circuits are busy, please try again later." After 15 minutes of pushing the redial button, I got suspicious and frustrated and dialed the "1115" number. I got through the first time. For every 20 or so times dialing "1111" only to hear "all circuits are busy" I dialed "1115" and got in every time. I am an old telephone PBX man and I sold telephone systems for years. I assure you that what I experienced is statistically impossible if both numbers were configured the same. I am going from the local 738 exchange to the Washington, D.C. 624 office. If the circuits are busy between the two offices, the system will get you there via New York, Chicago or Boston, etc. If all circuits are indeed saturated both 1111 and 1115 will get the same message. However, if there are five trunks per number and 1111 is configured with one answer trunk and four call transfer trunks to the recorded message and 1115 has five trunks and they are all answer trunks taking in "no impeachment" votes, that's where the Democrats can say "the survey proves" that the American people are against impeaching the president. Another Clinton lie! A desperate move by the Democrats to keep their pompous, arrogant, vindictive, immoral, lying man in office. He's not my president. - JEROME L. ARCHAMBAULT Dunedin -+-------------------------------------------------------------------------= - -------------------- I'm _NOT_ a "telephone man", but can see where it would be relatively easy for _anyone_ from a 'business phone' with multiple lines to 'jam' such a survey depending on how many lines the "surveyor" had available for rollover. I've spent a lot of time watching CSPAN, primarily to gather info for my HDTV echo. The CSPAN policy (not polling mind you) appears to be to accept one caller from each successive 'choice' in sequence. Quite often when they go to another line, no one is there. It's made me wonder, was there really a person there who got tired of waiting and running up LD charges, or had someone called and put that line on 'hold' just to tie up the system? M. ___ msged 1.99L MSC - Origin: Matt's Hot Solder Point, New Orleans, LA (1:396/1.4) ---=20 * Origin: TANSTAAFL BBS 717-432-0764 (1:270/615) =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 ARTICLE I =20 Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech or of the press;... - United States Constitution =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=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 NOTE: In accordance with Fair Use law, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. =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=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 The Berlin Wall Came Down The Soviet Union Collapsed The U.S. Government Then Turned On It's Own People The State Governments Followed The U.S. Government's Lead. =20 - Les Lemke =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-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D= -=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D Submit message by sending to Liberty-and-Justice@mailbox.by.net =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 Unsub info - send e-mail to , putting "unsubscribe liberty-and-justice" in the msg BODY (not subject) List-Owner of Liberty-and-Justice is Mike Goldman - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: GSL> UN AMMUNITION PANEL Date: 30 Dec 1998 09:09:01 -0700 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Wed, 30 Dec 1998 08:43:17 -0700 Received: from listbox.com by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id IAA05438; Wed, 30 Dec 1998 08:29:23 -0700 Received: (qmail 29687 invoked by uid 516); 30 Dec 1998 15:40:15 -0000 Delivered-To: rkba-co@majordomo.pobox.com Received: (qmail 29256 invoked from network); 30 Dec 1998 15:39:34 -0000 Received: from chai.pobox.com (208.210.124.35) by majordomo.pobox.com with SMTP; 30 Dec 1998 15:39:34 -0000 Received: from mail2.rockymtn.net (ns2.rockymtn.net [166.93.8.2]) by chai.pobox.com (VMailer) with ESMTP id 5C9AB154C; Wed, 30 Dec 1998 10:38:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from 166-93-76-185.rmi.net (166-93-76-185.rmi.net [166.93.76.185]) by mail2.rockymtn.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA23355; Wed, 30 Dec 1998 08:27:19 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <199812301527.IAA23355@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 Donna Ferolie (by way of = Douglas Davis ) ----------------------- http://thePentagon.com/FullBookJacket ------------ http://GunsSaveLives.com= For Immediate Release THE UN AMMUNITION PANEL The Ammunition Panel met at the United Nations in New York from April 27, to May 1,1998. At this time the membership of the Ammunition Panel is not publicly known. The panel is working under the unchallenged assumption that control of ammunition is the key to the control of small arms. The long term goal is to substantially increase regulation of international commercial shipments to complete bans on categories of ammunition such as prohibition of civilian possession military caliber rounds ( 308, 30-06, 303 etc ).Having these anti-firearm groups meeting in " secret " in order to make public policy for the Untied Nations is not acceptable. Law-abiding firearm owners have every right to be afraid - very afraid ! For more information contact: Donna Ferolie R.R 1 Hilton Beach Ontario, Canada POR 1GO=20 Fax: ( 705 )246-0689 e-mail: donnaferolie@sympatico.ca http://www3@sympatico.ca/donnaferolie Proud to be a firearm owner ! -------------------------- 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. For Help with Majordomo Commands, please send a message to: Majordomo@majordomo.pobox.com with the word Help in the body of the message -