From: utah-firearms-owner@xmission.com To: utah-firearms-digest@xmission.com Subject: utah-firearms Digest V2 #2 Reply-To: utah-firearms@xmission.com Errors-To: utah-firearms-owner@xmission.com Precedence: utah-firearms Digest Saturday, 3 August 1996 Volume 02 : Number 002 In this issue: [mongoose@INDIRECT.COM: Republicans Turn Tail -- Again] [mongoose@INDIRECT.COM: Harry Browne blasts Dole] [greggt@INDIRECT.COM: Zychik Chronicle 07/29/96 Part 2 (fwd)] Study: Weapons laws deter crime DEADLY THREAT Officer Bell CCW letter to editor Office Bell--letter to editor See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the utah-firearms or utah-firearms-digest mailing lists and on how to retrieve back issues. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: chardy@es.com (Charles Hardy) Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 10:24:41 -0600 Subject: [mongoose@INDIRECT.COM: Republicans Turn Tail -- Again] Wonder if our own Senators and Rep should see this as well? - ----BEGIN FORWARDED MESSGE---- NEWT GINGRICH TAKES A RIDE ON THE VON KLINTON EXPRESS By L. Neil Smith Special to _The Libertarian Enterprise_ I saw House Speaker Newt Gingrich on TV this afternoon, declaring that, in the light of the recent event in Atlanta, he, Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, and Republican Narcolepsy Poster Boy Bob Dole had changed the useless lumps of tissue they use for minds, with regard to certain unconstitutional provisions they had previously managed to keep out of Bill Clinton's so-called terrorism legislation. One of those provisions calls for "roving wiretaps": if someone they can credibly claim to believe _might_ be a terrorist happens to visit you for one reason or another -- perhaps because _they_ sent him - -- they can tap your phone. Another calls for "propellant taggants", chemical additives to black and smokeless gunpowder which, in certain loads might cause your weapon to hangfire or blow up, but what the hell, they don't want you to have guns anyway, and after all, as Julia Child or Mussolini or somebody put it, you can't make an omelette without breaking _heads_. There were other provisions, but a haze of outrage seems to have erased them from my memory. It's the oldest political scam in the book, and (with the apparent commendable exception of movie star and Tennessee Senator Fred Dalton Thompson) these spineless cretins in the GOP fell for it. Pick some handy enemy scapegoat (Libya or Iraq) or _create_ one (Libertarians or the militia), then goad them until they assassinate someone or blow something up. If you're really impatient, assassinate someone or blow something up _yourself_. Then tell everyone across the fruited plain and from sea to shining sea that -- for their own safety -- the whole country is now in protective custody. You can find it in the Bible, Machiavelli, or the doctrines of the Red Brigades. (Which is why I always thought that any voyages Young Bubba may have made to _Italy_ back in the 1960s might be far more significant than his infamous pilgrimage to Moscow). And still that trio of whimpering dribblers Newt Gingrich , Lott, and Dole fell for it. I gotta say, it never fails to amaze me how few brains or guts Republicans always turn out to possess. The craven idiots had a good thing going -- the "Republican Revolution" of 1994 -- yet they acted every minute afterward as if they were still in the minority. They let the whorish left-leaning mass media determine the level of discourse, the topics to be discussed, and the context they'd be discussed in. They let traitors in their own ranks screw up their agenda. They let themselves get caught up in trivial pseudo-issues and forgot the greater principles that were the reason voters had elected them. In short, as the revised saying goes, the Republicans "snatched defeat from the jaws of victory" and left everyone who supported them _exposed_ to the tin-pot two-for-a-penny fascist bully-ragging of William Jefferson Blythe Clinton. Or, as Sinclair Lewis referred to him in _It Can't happen Here_, "Buzz Windrip". (Didn't think we'd recognize you, did you, Bill?) The first ten Amendments to the Constitution obviously don't mean much to Newt Gingrich . (I seem to recall that he tried to have them suspended a few years ago, "for the duration" of the War on Drugs.) If they did, he'd never have tried to substitute what Rush Limbaugh (if Rush ever used _both_ halves of his brain) would call the "phoney-baloney plastic banana good-time rock'n'roll" Republican Contract with America for them. Deriving his "core beliefs" from polls and focus groups exactly the same way Clinton does, Newt Gingrich has forgotten -- if he ever knew -- certain basic facts ... What's right doesn't change overnight, even in Atlanta. What's right _never_ changes. Back when this was a free country, America worked. Now that it's a police state, it doesn't. There is no known instance in history in which a dangerous mess was made any better by "emergency measures" like hiring more thugs, passing more laws, or curtailing people's freedoms. There's a reason for that: peace, progress, and prosperity in _any_ civilization arise solely from individual human action. And humans must be _free_ to act. It ain't brain surgery, Mister Newt , or rocket science. When people are no longer free to act -- when they have no real investment in maintaining civilization -- civilization collapses. See the former Soviet Empire. Or the Reconstruction South. Or the South Bronx. If Newt Gingrich can't comprehend that, if he can't _keep_ the solemn oath he once took "to uphold and defend the Constitution against _all_ enemies, foreign and domestic", if he can't stand up to round-heeled propagandists masquerading as journalists, to white trash in the White House, or their goose-stepping orcs in black Kevlar, he should do the honorable thing: declare an end to the hollow sham his "Republican Revolution" has become, resign from the office he holds under false pretenses, slink back to Georgia, and start shoving soft-boiled eggs and milk-toast into his toothless, empty head like the harmless old grannie he increasingly resembles. I'll say it once again for the benefit of any Republicans in the audience. Maybe they can find somebody to read it for them, or at least explain the big words. What's right doesn't change overnight. What's right _never_ changes. Back when this was a free country, America worked. Now that it's a police state, it doesn't. =================================== L. Neil Smith's award-winning first novel, _The Probability Broach_, which has long been out of print, will be republished by TOR Books this October. Permission to redistribute this article is herewith granted by the author, provided that it is reproduced unedited, in its entirety, and appropriate credit given. Readers are especially urged to forward this article to Newt Gingrich , who desperately needs to read it. - ------------------- Chairman ------------------------------------------ Mike Dugger When in doubt, vote 'em out Armed and SAFE! Legalize Freedom - ELECT Libertarians - ----------- Arizona Libertarian Party --------------------------------- - ----END FORWARDED MESSAGE---- - -- Charles C. Hardy | If my employer has an opinion on these | topics, I'm sure I'm not the one he | would have express it. ------------------------------ From: chardy@es.com (Charles Hardy) Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 10:56:27 -0600 Subject: [mongoose@INDIRECT.COM: Harry Browne blasts Dole] - ----BEGIN FORWARDED MESSGE---- FYI - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- NEWS RELEASE 2600 Virginia Avenue, NW, Suite 100 ===== HARRY BROWNE ===== Washington, DC 20037 Libertarian for President For immediate release: July 16 1996 for information call: (202) 333-0008 Bill Winter, Director of Communications - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- RADIO ADS ON OLIVER NORTH SHOW BLAST BOB DOLE FOR BACKPEDALING ON ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN Libertarian candidate Harry Browne sets sights on "betrayed" gun owners WASHINGTON, DC -- Fans of the Oliver North radio program in 116 cities across the USA will hear Bob Dole blasted this week for flip-flopping on the assault weapons ban. The attacks are the opening salvo of a nationwide advertising campaign from Libertarian Party presidential candidate Harry Browne. "We want to reach conservatives who feel betrayed by Bob Dole's abandonment of the Second Amendment," explained Browne campaign director Sharon Ayres. "Dole figured he could sell out gun owners because they had nowhere else to go. Well, in 1996, they have somewhere to go: They can vote for Harry Browne." The advertisements stake out Browne's position as a fervent defender of the Second Amendment, and sharply criticize Dole for backpedaling on his promise to repeal the so-called assault weapons ban. They will run on the popular, syndicated right-wing talk show host's program during the week of July 15th to 19th. In one of the advertisements, Browne says: "Repeal the assault weapons ban now. Repeal the Brady Bill now. I'm Harry Browne, Libertarian candidate for President, saying government doesn't work and government gun control doesn't work. "Gun control disarms honest Americans while leaving guns in the hands of violent criminals. Bill Clinton is proud of the assault weapons ban, and Bob Dole refuses to repeal it. Bill Clinton is proud of the Brady Bill, and Bob Dole refuses to repeal it. If the right to keep and bear arms matters to you, Harry Browne is your candidate for President." The advertisements also give a toll-free number for more information about the Browne campaign and the Libertarian Party (800) 682-1776. Explaining his no-compromise position on gun issues, Browne said, "Gun control laws don't reduce crime, but passing them gives politicians another soap-box opportunity to pose as crime-fighters. Conservative politicians act tough by repealing the Bill of Rights, while liberal politicians act tough by outlawing weapons. Neither action reduces the crime rate. But both allow politicians to feel self-righteous, and both undermine our freedoms." - ------------------- Chairman ------------------------------------------ Mike Dugger When in doubt, vote 'em out Armed and SAFE! Legalize Freedom - ELECT Libertarians - ----------- Arizona Libertarian Party --------------------------------- - ----END FORWARDED MESSAGE---- - -- Charles C. Hardy | If my employer has an opinion on these | topics, I'm sure I'm not the one he | would have express it. ------------------------------ From: chardy@es.com (Charles Hardy) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 09:53:35 -0600 Subject: [greggt@INDIRECT.COM: Zychik Chronicle 07/29/96 Part 2 (fwd)] It is well worth the time to look up the following URL and read the letter. - ----BEGIN FORWARDED MESSGE---- >---------------All Rights Are Individual > >(ZC) Steve Silver, Founding Member of the Lawyers' >Second Amendment Society (LSAS) will be on KOGO radio in >San Diego today 7/29 at 5:00 PM, PST. Mr. Silver will be >discussing the Hickman case. Essentially, the 9th District Court >ruled that Mr. Hickman could not bring suit for his right to bear >arms on Second Amendment grounds. The Court reasoned the >right to bear arms is reserved for the States, not individuals. > >The NRA, of course, is *not* appealing the case to the >Supreme Court. > >So, Mr. Silver and Mr. Dan Schultz also of the LSAS closed >down their law practices for 10 days and worked their butts off >to meet the filing deadline for an appeal to the Supreme Clown >Convention. > >Mr. Hickman will be on the show also. Hopefully, everyone >understands that if the Second Amendment means that only >States have the right to bear arms, then only States have the >right to freedom of religion and press. Or is that too logical for >some of my anti-gun readers to grasp? > >---------------Enthusiastic Corrections: > >(ZC) Last week I mentioned a fantastic document which >explains how capitalism really works. Unfortunately I typo-ed >the location - which resulted in a wonderful surprise. Many >readers figured out the typo, found the location and wrote back >with rave reviews about the document which was written by TJ >Rodgers of Cypress Semiconductor. Here's the correct >location: > >http://www.cypress.com/cypress/cyp_news/gormley.htm ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >If you're the least bit curious about what Capitalism truly is, >fire up your browser and take a look. > >-- [major snip] Rick Tompkins "I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery." THOMAS JEFFERSON - ----END FORWARDED MESSAGE---- - -- Charles C. Hardy | If my employer has an opinion on | these topics, I'm sure I'm not | the one he would have express it. "Indeed, I am now of the opinion that a compelling case for "stricter gun control" cannot be made, at least not on empirical grounds. I have nothing but respect for the various pro-gun control advocates with whom I have come in contact over the past years. They are, for the most part, sensitive, humane and intelligent people, and their ultimate aim, to reduce death and violence in our society, is one that every civilized person must share. I have, however, come to be convinced that they are barking up the wrong tree." -- James Wright (scholarly research who collaborates with Peter Rossi) ------------------------------ From: righter@aros.net Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 19:32:17 -0600 Subject: Study: Weapons laws deter crime http://www.usatoday.com/news/nds1.htm > [Keep an eye on your competitors | www.personal.infoseek.com] > > 08/02/96 - 11:18 AM ET - Click reload often for latest version > > Study: Weapons laws deter crime > > In a comprehensive study that may reshape the gun control debate, > researchers have found that letting people carry concealed guns > appears to sharply reduce killings, rapes and other violent crimes. > > The nationwide study found that violent crime fell after states made > it legal to carry concealed handguns: > > * Homicide, down 8.5%. > * Rape, down 5%. > * Aggravated assault, down 7%. > > The University of Chicago study, obtained by USA TODAY, is set to be > released next Thursday. But its impending release has already sent > shock waves through the gun-control debate because of the effect it > may have on one of the most controversial areas of gun law. > > Since 1986, the number of states making it legal to carry concealed > weapons has grown from nine to 31. > > The National Rifle Association has led this fight in state > legislatures, arguing that concealed weapons deter crime. > > Gun control supporters counter that these laws cost lives by > increasing accidental deaths and impulsive killings. > > The study analyzed FBI crime statistics in the nation's 3,054 counties > from 1977 to 1992 to see if the introduction of concealed-weapons laws > had any effect on crime. > > The results overwhelmingly supported the idea that these laws deter > violent crime. > > The drop isn't primarily caused by people defending themselves with > guns, says John Lott, the study's author. Rather, criminals seem to > alter their behavior to avoid coming into contact with a person who > might have a gun. > > Concealed-weapons laws have drawbacks, too, the study found. Auto > theft and larceny increased. Criminals shifted to property offenses, > in which contact with a victim is rare, says Lott. > > "The policy implications are undeniable: If you're interested in > reducing murder and rape, then letting law-abiding, mentally competent > citizens carry concealed weapons has a positive impact," says Lott. > > Gun control backer Josh Sugarman of the Violence Policy Center blasted > the study: "Anyone who argues that these laws reduce crime either > doesn't understand the nature of crime or has a preset agenda." > > Lott, who spent two years on the study, says he sent his research to > scholars who might disagree with him and made changes to satisfy the > critics. > > David Kopel, a gun control scholar who did a smaller study on the same > issue, says, "Lott's study is so far ahead of all previous studies > that it makes them all worthless." > > By Dennis Cauchon, USA TODAY <---- End Forwarded Message ----> Sarah Thompson, M.D. Dedicated to ALL Civil Liberties The Righter The Demo-Cans have betrayed us! PO Box 271231 Vote Libertarian! Salt Lake City, UT 84127-1231 Harry Browne for President 801-966-7278 - fax & voice mail righter@aros.net http://www/aros.net/~righter/welcome.html ------------------------------ From: righter@aros.net Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 01:06:35 -0600 Subject: DEADLY THREAT The following letter to the editor appeared in the Salt Lake Tribune Friday. It looks like we may now have to defend ourselves from the police! Personally, I think Officer Bell is a "rogue cop" and HE should be seeking other employment since he's obviously a danger to the people he's supposed to protect. Since when do police officers publicly threaten the citizens they "serve" with violence? If you agree, I'd suggest writing to the following: Chief Ruben Ortega Salt Lake City Police Dept. 315 E. 200 South Salt Lake City, UT 84102 Mayor Deedee Corradini 451 S. State Street Salt Lake City, UT 84111 Superintendent Douglas Bordrero Utah Dept. of Public Safety 4501 S. 2700 West West Valley City, UT 84119 Thanks! Sarah (At least I'VE taken an oath never to INITIATE violence. Shouldn't the police do the same?) http://www.sltrib.com/96/AUG/02/tlt/22521918.htm > The Salt Lake Tribune Public Forum > Friday, August 2, 1996 > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > DEADLY THREAT > > > [Image] Dave Servatius (Forum, July 14) he wrote > that he has discussed the issue of citizens carrying > (concealed) firearms with ``numerous'' law > enforcement officers. He further indicated that these > officers, in private, support and even encourage > citizens to carry firearms. He then identified two > members of the Salt Lake City Police Department as > having told him that it was their belief that the > police `` . . . cannot insure the safety of the > citizens.'' > > [Image] If these two officers actually made such a > statement, I would recommend that they find new > employment. I am familiar with both identified > officers and therefore somewhat suspect their > motivation for making such a statement, if in fact > they made such a statement. I believe both have a > personal agenda regarding anything that resembles > ``gun control.'' This might have influenced their > thought on this matter. > > [Image] I have worked for the Salt Lake City Police > Department longer than either of the two officers > mentioned by Servatius and I have never felt that we > (police) cannot insure the safety of our citizens. I > know for certain that carrying a Combat Colt under > your jacket is not going to protect your house from > being burglarized while you're away. However, joining > or establishing a Neighborhood Watch could save it. > Taking your Glock 9mm to the library will not stop > the next gang-related shooting, but becoming involved > in the Mobile Watch might. > > [Image] I would like to inform Servatius and any > others who believe that simply tucking that gun under > their shirt will be beneficial to always wear old > clothing. If I or any other law enforcement officer > observes your ``hidden'' weapon, you will be lying > face down in the dirt having handcuffs placed on you. > I and others involved in law enforcement cannot > afford to get into the mind set that a person > carrying a hidden handgun is just a ``good'' citizen. > What you become is a potential deadly threat to me, > and I have to treat you as such. > > [Image] So remember, the questions as to who you > are and why you are carrying the gun will come after > you are face down and handcuffed. > > D.B. BELL > Salt Lake City > ------------------------------------------------------ > > © Copyright 1996, 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. Sarah Thompson, M.D. Dedicated to ALL Civil Liberties The Righter The Demo-Cans have betrayed us! PO Box 271231 Vote Libertarian! Salt Lake City, UT 84127-1231 Harry Browne for President 801-966-7278 - fax & voice mail righter@aros.net http://www/aros.net/~righter/welcome.html ------------------------------ From: chardy@es.com (Charles Hardy) Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 17:09:20 -0600 Subject: Officer Bell Below is my letter to the SLC police department and mayor's office submitted for your critique. Please join suite and let the big brother know that this is unacceptable behaviour. Charles Hardy xxxxxx xxxxx August 3, 1996 Chief Ruben Ortega Salt Lake City Police Dept. 315 E. 200 South Salt Lake City, UT 84102 Mayor Deedee Corradini 451 S. State Street Salt Lake City, UT 84111 Dear Mayor Corradini and Chief Ortega I have just read a letter to the editor in the Salt Lake Tribune from an officer D.B. Bell. That letter is transcribed below for your convenience. In this public letter, officer Bell informs the 12,160 law-abiding citizens of this State who have received the requisite training and submitted to fingerprinting, photographs, and background checks and have been issued permits by the State to carry a concealed weapons that "[i]f [he] or any other law enforcement officer observes [their] ``hidden'' weapon, [they] will be lying face down in the dirt having handcuffs placed on [them]." He also states "the questions as to who [they] are and why [they] are carrying the gun will come after [they] are face down and handcuffed." He justifies this course of action by writing, "I and others involved in law enforcement cannot afford to get into the mind set that a person carrying a hidden handgun is just a ``good'' citizen." I must strenuously disagree. Given that Utah law specifically provides for adults to carry a "hidden" weapon, those in law enforcement appear to have no choice but to "get into the mind set" that at least some, if not many or most, non-threating adults carrying "hidden" guns are, in fact "just 'good' citizens." In light of current State law, officer Bell's statement appears to be a threat of unnecessary and inappropriate force. I am concerned we may have an insecure and hot-headed officer who seems prone to violence taking it upon himself to pronounce police department policy with regard to appropriate officer reaction upon suspecting or discovering a concealed firearm on an individual offering neither threats nor violence. I am even more concerned at the possibility that throwing non-threating, law-abiding adults to the ground at the first hint of a bulge under their clothes may, in fact, be police department policy. Or that the department has no clear policy in this area and leaves the handling of such situations too much to the individual officer's discretion -- officers such as D.B. Bell who have already decided that gestapo-like police-state tactics are appropriate courses of action to take with their employers, the tax-paying public. It appears to me that officer Bell is opposed to citizens carrying firearms for self defense. That is his right. However, if he wishes to outlaw the carrying of concealed firearms he should employ the legislative process as law-abiding citizens are expected. Unfortunately, he seems bent on abusing his office of public trust and taking the law into his own hands to prevent the carrying of concealed weapons through harassment, intimidation, and violence. Such action would appear to border on "Infringement of Civil Rights under color of law" -- a federal offense if I'm not mistaken. I hereby formally request that a hearing be convened to determine it officer Bell's comments and promised course of action are in harmony with departmental policy and State and Federal laws. I also request to be informed of the outcome of said hearing. I further request that a copy of official Salt Lake City Police Department policy on officer handling of situations in which a non-violent, non-threating individual is suspected of, or is found to be, in possession of a concealed weapon, along with training standards in this area be sent to me at my address above. If either such policy or training standards do not exist, I request a written statement to that effect on departmental letter head and bearing the signature of an official legally empowered to speak for the department. The citizens of this State, particularly those who have fulfilled the full requirements of the law and choose to exercise their rights to self-defense, are under no obligation to be subjected to State sponsored violence just to allay the concerns of police officers who, it seems, are too ill-trained to insure their own safety through legal, appropriate, and less intrusive, demeaning means. Your prompt attention in this most serious matter of public safety and potential civil rights abuse, as well as your written response including the requested documentation of departmental policy and training is most appreciated. Sincerely Charles Hardy Transcribed from the August 2, 1996 Salt Lke Tribune. DEADLY THREAT Dave Servatius (Forum, July 14) he wrote that he has discussed the issue of citizens carrying (concealed) firearms with ``numerous'' law enforcement officers. He further indicated that these officers, in private, support and even encourage citizens to carry firearms. He then identified two members of the Salt Lake City Police Department as having told him that it was their belief that the police `` . . . cannot insure the safety of the citizens.'' If these two officers actually made such a statement, I would recommend that they find new employment. I am familiar with both identified officers and therefore somewhat suspect their motivation for making such a statement, if in fact they made such a statement. I believe both have a personal agenda regarding anything that resembles ``gun control.'' This might have influenced their thought on this matter. I have worked for the Salt Lake City Police Department longer than either of the two officers mentioned by Servatius and I have never felt that we (police) cannot insure the safety of our citizens. I know for certain that carrying a Combat Colt under your jacket is not going to protect your house from being burglarized while you're away. However, joining or establishing a Neighborhood Watch could save it. Taking your Glock 9mm to the library will not stop the next gang-related shooting, but becoming involved in the Mobile Watch might. I would like to inform Servatius and any others who believe that simply tucking that gun under their shirt will be beneficial to always wear old clothing. If I or any other law enforcement officer observes your ``hidden'' weapon, you will be lying face down in the dirt having handcuffs placed on you. I and others involved in law enforcement cannot afford to get into the mind set that a person carrying a hidden handgun is just a ``good'' citizen. What you become is a potential deadly threat to me, and I have to treat you as such. So remember, the questions as to who you are and why you are carrying the gun will come after you are face down and handcuffed. D.B. BELL Salt Lake City - -- Charles C. Hardy | If my employer has an opinion on | these topics, I'm sure I'm not | the one he would have express it. "...the rank and file are usually much more primitive than we imagine. Propaganda must therefore always be essentially simple and repetitious." -- Joseph Goebbels - Nazi Propaganda Minister ------------------------------ From: chardy@es.com (Charles Hardy) Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 17:15:04 -0600 Subject: CCW letter to editor Finally, a letter to the editor (don't know which one yet since I wrote it before reading aobut officer Bell and am sending a reply to his letter to the tribune--probably the Deseret News and Daily Spectrum.) Feel free to critique or, on the outside chance you see something usefull, to steal from, the following: Charles Hardy xxxx xxx Dear Editor I am a bit confused by the irony of the arguments put forth by those opposed to the carrying of concealed weapons. On the one hand, these individuals do not trust upstanding citizens to make it through the day without loosing such control of their faculties as to begin shooting people at random. On the other hand, they think that the criminal element in our society is going to honor their notion of "no-crime" zones. As of July 1, there were approximately 12,160 Utah citizens holding State issued permits to carry a concealed weapon (CCW). To date not a single permit holder has illegally shot another person. Not one! There is a higher risk of being shot under questionable circumstances by a police officer than by a private citizen legally carrying a concealed weapon. Now consider the folly of thinking "no-crime" zone exists. Some have expressed the opinion that libraries are not a place for violence. I whole-heartedly agree. But then neither are churches, schools, hospitals, parks, streets, nor homes. However, even a cursory look through our own papers will indicate that criminal violence does occur in all these places. The fact that criminals often employ a firearm against defenseless victims only underscores the need for law-abiding citizens to have firearms available for their self-defense. I do not, nor have I ever held a State issued permit to carry a concealed weapon. My reasons are, I suspect, as personal and varied as the reasons of those who do. However, we all owe a debt of gratitude to those who do decide to carry weapons. As reported in the August 2nd USA Today, a new study by John Lott at the University of Chicago indicates that nationwide, violent crime fell by roughly 7% in areas where citizens are allowed to carry concealed weapons. It seems rapists, murderers, and thugs prefer unarmed victims and the potential of a concealed weapon makes it tough to single out the safe targets. Neither the 90 pound jogger nor the 90 year old grandmother are such easy prey if they are trained and armed. Sincerely Charles Hardy - -- Charles C. Hardy | If my employer has an opinion on | these topics, I'm sure I'm not | the one he would have express it. "...the rank and file are usually much more primitive than we imagine. Propaganda must therefore always be essentially simple and repetitious." -- Joseph Goebbels - Nazi Propaganda Minister ------------------------------ From: chardy@es.com (Charles Hardy) Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 17:26:12 -0600 Subject: Office Bell--letter to editor Below is my letter to the editor of the SLT. Fire up your assault word processors... Charles Hardy xxxx xxx Dear Editor I am deeply troubled by Officer D.B. Bell's August 2nd letter to the Salt Lake Tribune editor entitled "Deadly Treat" wherein he informs the 12,160 law-abiding citizens of this State who have received the requisite training and submitted to fingerprinting, photographs, and background checks and have been issued permits by the State to carry a concealed weapons that "[i]f [he] or any other law enforcement officer observes [their] ``hidden'' weapon, [they] will be lying face down in the dirt having handcuffs placed on [them]." He also states "the questions as to who [they] are and why [they] are carrying the gun will come after [they] are face down and handcuffed." He justifies this course of action by writing, "I and others involved in law enforcement cannot afford to get into the mind set that a person carrying a hidden handgun is just a ``good'' citizen." I must strenuously disagree. Given that Utah law specifically provides for adults to carry a "hidden" weapon, those in law enforcement appear to have no choice but to "get into the mind set" that at least some, if not many or most, non-threating adults carrying "hidden" guns are, in fact "just 'good' citizens" and treat them with due respect. It appears to me that officer Bell is opposed to citizens carrying firearms for self defense. That is his right. However, if he wishes to outlaw the carrying of concealed firearms he should employ the legislative process as law-abiding citizens are expected. Unfortunately, he seems bent on abusing his office of public trust and taking the law into his own hands to prevent the carrying of concealed weapons through threats of harassment, intimidation, and violence. Such action would appear to border on "Infringement of Civil Rights under color of law" -- a federal offense if I'm not mistaken. I encourage all those concerned about their safety and civil liberties to contact the Salt Lake City Police Department and Mayor's Office and demand that this rogue cop be reined in. Sincerely Charles Hardy - -- Charles C. Hardy | If my employer has an opinion on | these topics, I'm sure I'm not | the one he would have express it. "...the rank and file are usually much more primitive than we imagine. Propaganda must therefore always be essentially simple and repetitious." -- Joseph Goebbels - Nazi Propaganda Minister ------------------------------ End of utah-firearms Digest V2 #2 ********************************* To subscribe to utah-firearms Digest, send the command: subscribe utah-firearms-digest in the body of a message to "majordomo@xmission.com". If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-utah-firearms": subscribe utah-firearms-digest local-utah-firearms@your.domain.net A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "utah-firearms-digest" in the commands above with "utah-firearms". Back issues are available for anonymous FTP from ftp.xmission.com, in pub/lists/utah-firearms/archive. These are organized by date.