From: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com (roc-digest) To: roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: roc-digest V2 #288 Reply-To: roc-digest Sender: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk roc-digest Friday, October 8 1999 Volume 02 : Number 288 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 3 Oct 99 21:31:54 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Fw: Yes, guns do belong in schools. (fwd) On Oct 3, McGeheeZone.com wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] - ----- Original Message ----- From: Dave Williams To: Dave Williams Sent: Sunday, October 03, 1999 10:08 PM Subject: Yes, guns do belong in schools. Yes, guns do belong in schools. By Joe Nava Let me tell you why. There have been guns in schools as long as there have been schools. There are good people and there are bad people, but there are no good guns or bad guns. Guns are tools, which can be used for good or bad purposes by people. Guns have been used for good purposes in schools for a very long time, and they should still be. Let me make my case. Guns are used in the Olympic Games, just as the javelin, the discus, and the basketball are. Not counting the Biathlon in the Winter Olympics, there are 15 shooting events in the Summer Olympics. Some events are for women only and some are for men only. These events use rifles, pistols, shotguns, and airguns. Both women and men use semi-automatic handguns in the Olympics. Where do these Olympic Shooters come from? Most come from College shooting programs which train them. In the United States there are Colleges that give 4 year scholarships for shooting, the same way they do for basketball and football, etc. Top athletes compete for NCAA Rifle Championship distinction or NRA Pistol Championship distinction or NCUI Shotgun Championship distinction. Where do these College shooters come from? Here in the United States we have High School shooting programs. Many schools have ROTC Programs, which train shooters and prepare youngsters for a possible stint in the military. Shooting is a Varsity Sport in some schools. And, it should be for many reasons. Most Olympic shooters get started in a 4-H or Boy Scout or NRA junior shooting program and then get on a High School or Junior High School Shooting Team. If they are good enough, they get a scholarship to a college with a shooting program (like the University of Alaska Fairbanks). After College, the best of the shooters may go on to a National Training Center to prepare for Olympic or other International Shooting competition. Why is this good for the schools? Shooting is the least violent of all the school sports. Shooters don t grab, tackle or check the opponent. They don t even bump into the opponent. Also, shooting, as a sport, has an unequaled safety record. There are more injuries in Table Tennis than there are in shooting competitions. The greatest benefit of guns in schools, for the youngsters, is the self-discipline the gun teaches. Shooting takes much self-control. Any high school or college shooter learns this. It takes mental self-control to ignore all else around you and concentrate on the goal at hand. This mental self-discipline learned through shooting, carries over into school work and life. Shooting Teams in schools are always at the head of their class in academics. Shooting teaches the discipline it takes to excel in school. The experience at UAF (University of Alaska) is no different than it is in any college. The Shooting Team will always have the highest average GPA of any sporting team. It is partially a product of the skills learned in shooting. I have never heard of a case, anywhere in the United States, of a School Shooting Team Member being involved in the criminal use of a gun. Never has any gun used for a school shooting program been used illegally. This doesn t happen. Guns are not bad in schools. They are good. The result of a supervised athletic shooting program is positive, and there is no risk to it. Another good reason why guns belong in school is for teaching gun safety. I have done this in Fairbanks for many years. I can take my guns into a school classroom, with the schools permission, and teach a class in gun safety. This will prevent accidents and save lives. Gun safety should be taught in schools. If you want fewer gun accidents, the solution is more gun safety education. Hunter Education can also be taught in the schools for those who want to continue the Hunting Lifestyle that we prize so highly here in Alaska. The Alaska Dept. of Fish & Game has gladly arranged this for any school that wants it. They can do it for your school too. Education decreases gun accidents. Legislation doesn t. Let us teach gun safety in the schools to those students whose parents want them to be safer around guns. I can guarantee this will decrease the possibility of any child having, or being the victim of, a firearms accident at any time in the future. Where is the risk in that? There is none. It is a win-win situation where the children are safer when they encounter guns later in life, and they will, someday. Even the school is safer because more students understand more about gun safety, and they are more self-disciplined. So, admire those students who have the will and the dedication to achieve that degree of mental self-discipline to win a place on a school shooting team. Give them the chance to achieve in an Olympic Sport. One example I can give you is April Blajeski who honed her shooting skills as a High School Athlete in Delta and then got a Shooting scholarship to UAF and achieved NRA All-American Honors for her ability. Another example I can give you is myself. I discovered shooting in College at UAF. I learned the importance of self-discipline in shooting and in life. That helped me to achieve All-American Honors and to continue my schoolwork and my life in what I hope has been an ethical and worthwhile manner. Punish the misuse of guns anywhere, including in schools. But, leave guns in the schools for good purposes. The benefits are great for the youngster and for the community, and there is no risk. __________________________________________________________________________ Printed in the October 2nd, , 1999 issue of the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner Joe Nava, Volunteer Gun Safety Instructor, author. I have received permission of the author to forward this piece. [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA! - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Oct 99 20:31:17 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Proof of Press Bias (fwd) On Oct 04, equaltime@freedom.usa.com wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] Hello, everyone. You may have already seen the reports. In case you haven't... A new poll from the Roper Center and the Freedom Forum has rocked the world of journalism. It proves that Washington-based reporters and editors are even more liberal than we thought. Just look at the numbers: 89% voted for Clinton in 1992 (as opposed to 43% of the public); only 7% voted for Bush; only 4% are registered Republicans, while 50% are Democrats; only 3% think the Contract with America was a serious proposal. And get this: only 2% call themselves conservative. What about religion? Surveys show the United States is one of the most religious countries in the world. Every year since 1952, Gallup polls have found that about 90% of Americans claim their faith is important. On the other hand, a U.S. News & World Report survey of Hollywood executives found that only 44% considered religion important. Another study revealed that 86% of journalists seldom or never attend church, and 50% don't even believe in God. Does the product from the news and entertainment media reflect society's views? Not only do both the news and entertainment media not care about religion, when they do touch on it, they regularly attack it. Phil Visit our site at: http://www.crosswinds.net/~equaltime/ Limited Government - Individual Liberty - Conservative Values [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA! - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Oct 99 10:20:45 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Nice article (fwd) On Oct 05, Don Loftus wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] I read this on the WorldNet Daily web (http://www.WorldNetDaily.com/) site and thought ya'll would enjoy it. Go to the following address for the original posting: http://www.enterstageright.com/1099billrights.htm Don Loftus Gainesville, FL - ----------------------- I watched the Bill of Rights dying last week By Vin Suprynowicz web posted October 4, 1999 One recent morning I watched the Bill of Rights dying. I don't know if anyone else noticed; it's been on its deathbed so long that most folks don't even go visit anymore. Following a speaking engagement in Marina del Rey the evening before, I found myself approaching the security checkpoint at Terminal 1 of LAX at 6:10 a.m. Sept. 21, preparing to catch the 7:56 to Vegas. Approaching the baggage X-ray machine, I noted the now-familiar sign listing the facility's international red circle-and-slash prohibitions, warning passengers they'll be jailed if found in possession of a firearm or even a can of pepper spray -- this now thoroughly routine rape of the Second Amendment drawing not a single glance from the customers standing in line for their morning McDonald's coffee, despite the fact it was occurring in their full view. In fact, after a successful evening selling and signing books, a combination of the absurd local firearms restriction of Los Angeles County and this anti-self-defense policy of the airlines and the FAA had left me wandering the streets of Los Angeles at midnight the night before, searching out an open Burger King, with $500 cash on my person. Had I been beaten and robbed of that sum, do you suppose the airline, or the FAA, or the County of Los Angeles would have made good my loss, since it was their unconstitutional conspiracy that deprived me of my right to safely and legally carry a firearm (or even a can of pepper-spray) for self-defense, as I otherwise would surely have done? I don't think so. Past the now-familiar notices of anti-gun tyranny, I pushed my carry-on bag through the X-ray machine, submitting to its scan of my personal effects despite the fact neither the airline nor the airport administration held any warrant to search them, nor even offered me any probable cause. But was that enough? Not that day. As my bag came down the belt, a tall, sleepy-eyed young man with a shaved head and an ill-fitting blue blazer, standing on the other side of the conveyer belt, asked "Sir, do you mind if I search your bag?" I replied: "Actually, I do mind. I do not consent to any search of my bag." The young man acted as though I had not heard his question. "Sir, do you mind if I search your bag?" "Yes, I do mind. I do not grant my consent for any search of my bag." "Sir," he repeated, "do you mind if I search your bag?" I still don't know how long this would have continued. Sensing that it was up to me to jog the needle on this trance-like broken record, I next asked, "Did you see something on the X-ray that looked like a weapon?" "No sir," he admitted. "It's a random search." "A random search?" "A random search." At this point, a bearded dwarf in a tweed jacket, looking for all the world like former Clinton cabinet secretary Robert Reich, appeared at my left shoulder, coming to the aid of my somnolent oppressor. "He can ask you to search the bag, and if you refuse, he doesn't have to let you continue," said this strange apparition, holding his own two suitcases and a plastic shopping bag. "How is this any concern of yours?" I asked the dwarf. "Do you work for the airline?" "No," he smiled proudly, like an enormously self-contented bridge-player laying down the last trump card. "I work for the FAA." "And you're on duty here?" "No, I'm not. But I know about this," he smiled even more broadly. "Then you must know the security directive says they should ask to see our photo ID, but it specifically goes on to say that if we refuse, they can not bar us from boarding" I said quite firmly, drawing the attention of the sleepy-eyed fellow's lady supervisor, who now waddled over to join us. "So I assume it's the same with these 'random bag checks.' That's why they ask for our permission, right? If they don't need our consent, why keep asking for it?" Astonishingly enough, at this point, the little dwarf's smile collapsed, and he turned and trundled away like a disturbed woodchuck. Given that he presumably took an oath before God to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution, which still contains the Bill of Rights, it's unlikely the leering little geek's immortal soul will escape as easily. Sir," asked the tall young man, clinging to the security of his minimal training, and apparently hoping to break the record set by Paul McCartney, who once managed to find more than a dozen different ways to sing the eight words "Why don't we do it in the road?" in the same recording ... "do you mind if I check your bag?" "Listen," I said, "I do not grant my consent, and I'm not going to grant my consent. If you believe you don't need my consent, then do what you have to do." At this point, with his supervisor looking on, the young man went through the motions of unzipping and re-zipping the two small side compartments on my bag, barely glancing at, in turn, a clean pair of white socks and a plastic bottle of Pepto-Bismol. He never undid the straps or unzipped the main body of the bag, at all. "Thank you," he said. "I'm not going to thank you," I replied, "because we still have a Fourth Amendment in this country, which protects us from warrantless searches. You do know that, right?" The bald young man looked right through me, focusing on the far wall, his heavy-lidded eyes blinking slowly. His companion, a grossly fat black woman in the ill-fitting rust-red jacket of a "supervisor," who had been puffing up to say something before the FAA troll butted in, looked disgusted but averted her eyes, refusing to meet my gaze. These are the faces of tyranny, bored and uncaring. When instructed to load us political nonconformists onto cattle cars bound for the internment camps, they will do so in unquestioning, shuffling boredom, eyeing the clock to make sure they don't work a minute into their next scheduled break. Thus are our precious constitutional rights daily rendered null and void by uncaring stooges, like dying rest-home patients clutching their bedframes in silent agony, writhing their death throes in their own excrement as the bored orderlies play cards in the break room down the hall, the sound turned up on the cheerful idiot morning TV calisthenics show, hoping their shifts will end before someone comes in and orders them to go change the sheets. Vin Suprynowicz is assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas Review-Journal. His new book, "Send in the Waco Killers: Essays on the Freedom Movement, 1993-1998," is available at $21.95 plus $3 shipping through Mountain Media, P.O. Box 271122, Las Vegas, Nev. 89127; or at 1-800-244-2224; or via web site http://www.thespiritof76.com/wacokillers.html. - - To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@mainstream.net, and as the body of the message (plain text, no HTML), send the following: . unsubscribe noban email-address . where email-address is the address under which you are subscribed. Report problems to owner-noban@mainstream.net [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA! - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Oct 99 19:21:04 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: The Club For Growth Steven Moore and Dusty Roads(sp?) are travelling the Country for, "The Club For Growth". Right up front, the entry fee is $100. For this you get a list of good Conservative types for voting, which frankly isn't a unique thing, but there are some differences. First off, these guys actually vet the Candidates/Incumbents, look at the record, and if they're a, "squishy", they see to it that they're challenged at the ballot by a real Conservative. Part of their mission is to Conservatize the Republican Party, but they're willing to work with viable 3P Candidates, too. They started in New York, but now they're going National, and the initial Target is the 2000 Election. Check out their web site at clubforgrowth.org, (not sure if there's a, "www", there or not, as I've got a newsfeed going right now, and getting this info off the Radio, so I can't check it yet myself. Their phone number is 1-202-955-5500. Dusty is the publisher of National Review. - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA! - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Oct 99 14:36:54 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: FW: STAND UP TO RED CHINA !!! (fwd) For those not in the know, Governor Gary "China Money" Locke is the Chinese American version of a Loony Left Liberal Clinton Clone, and desperately needs to have his ears filled on this kind of thing. On Oct 6, Graham, Brandi wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] > Do you care that China condemns millions of women to receiving forced > abortions and sterilizations? Do you lament that millions of children and > prisoners are forced to slave away for the Red Chinese for little or no > pay, and at the same time take jobs away from Americans as cheap foreign > goods flood our market? Are you concerned about Communist China's > horrific > military build-up, much of which was based on the theft of top-secret > American military technology? And are you concerned that the next > offensive > use of nuclear weapons may be directed at your home town from Beijing? > > If you answered yes to any of these questions, you should be very upset to > learn that on Tuesday, October 5, 1999, Governor Gary Locke (D-Washington) > had the Red Chinese flag flown at the state capitol. Not only that, but > it > was positioned in the center pole, between the U.S. and Washington flags. > Anyone who has served in the U.S. military will attest to the fact that > the > American Flag, Old Glory, is always to fly either on the highest mast, or > in > the center. > > If you are as upset as any patriotic American ought to be, give the > governor > a call and ask him to apologize for placing Communist China ahead of the > United States -- and maybe ask why he thought they were worth honoring to > begin with. Call him at (360) 902-4111. > > AND PASS THIS E-MAIL ALONG TO EVERY PATRIOTIC AMERICAN YOU KNOW !!! > > P.S. Apparently, the flag of the "Butchers of Beijing" was flown to > "welcome" the Party Secretary of the Jiangsu province to Olympia for trade > talks. But just because we do business with the Chinese doesn't mean we > should lend any support or tolerance to their brutal, totalitarian regime. > > Don't forget: Governor Locke's office number is (360) 902-4111. CALL > TODAY > AND STAND UP FOR AMERICA!!! > > AND DON'T FORGET TO FORWARD THIS E-MAIL TO YOUR FRIENDS!!! [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA! - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Oct 99 20:07:53 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: US Firearms deaths down again in '98 (fwd) On Oct 6, Joel A. Butler, MD wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] 1997...........32,436 1998...........29,849 Homicides also down (includes legal intervention) 1997...........19,846 1998...........17,350 Source: http://www.cdc.gov/nchswww/whatsnew/whatsnew.htm Births and Deaths: Preliminary Data for 1998. Vol. 47, No. 25. 48. pp. = (PHS) 99-1120. (10/5/1999) PDF file. Also of interest are the charts to be found by linking through = "objective charts" on page = http://www.cdc.gov/nchswww/about/otheract/hp2000/violence/violence.htm #######jab [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA! - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Oct 99 11:00:40 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Good news (fwd) On Oct 07, Don Loftus wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] Perhaps there is hope after all? Don Loftus Gainesville, Florida - ------------------ Cincinnati's suit against gun makers dismissed Copyright © 1999 Nando Media Copyright © 1999 Associated Press CINCINNATI (October 7, 1999 11:14 a.m. EDT http://www.nandotimes.com) - A state judge on Thursday dismissed the city's lawsuit against gun manufacturers, a distributor and three trade associations on the grounds it was vague and unsupported by legal precedent. Several other cities across the country also have sued the firearms industry. Thursday's action was the first dismissal of such a suit, a lawyer for gun manufacturers said. Jim Dorr, a Chicago lawyer for gun makers Sturm, Ruger & Co. Inc., of Southport, Conn., and Smith & Wesson Corp., of Springfield, Mass., said he hopes to use the ruling by Hamilton County Common Pleas Judge Robert Ruehlman in seeking the dismissal of 17 similar lawsuits representing 27 city or county governments. Those lawsuits are pending in state or federal courts around the country. "These lawsuits filed by the cities have been, in our opinion, nothing but smoke and mirrors with no legal foundation to them," Dorr said. Ruehlman became the first judge to dismiss any of the lawsuits, Dorr said. [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA! - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Oct 99 15:40:36 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Treat Guns Like Car, Great Idea (fwd) On Oct 8, RJK.Sr. wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] TAKING IT TO THE STREETS Why treating guns like cars might not be such a bad idea. by David B. Kopel.. Should we treat guns like cars? Handgun Control Inc. has been saying so for years, and this summer Vice President Al Gore agreed. "We require a license to drive a car in this nation in order to keep unsafe drivers off the road," Gore said. "As president, I will fight for a national requirement that every state issue photo licenses [for handgun buyers]. We should require a license to own a handgun so people who shouldn't have them can't get them." Prospective licensees should have to "pass a background test and pass a gun safety test." Gore predicted that his plan would cause the gun lobby to "have a fit." Actually, if Gore follows through on his promise to treat guns like cars, he will oversee the most massive decontrol of firearms in America since 1868, when the 14th Amendment abolished the Southern states' Black Codes, which prevented freedmen from owning guns. Although anti-gun lobbyists who use the car analogy are pushing for additional controls, laws that really did treat guns like cars would be much less restrictive, on the whole, than what we have now. The first thing to go would be the 1986 federal ban on the manufacture of machine guns for sale to ordinary citizens. We don't ban cars like Porsches just because they are high-powered and can drive much faster than the speed limit. Even though it's a lot easier to go 50 miles per hour over the highway speed limit in a Porsche than in a Hyundai, we let people own any car they want, no matter what its potential for abuse. After getting rid of the machine gun ban, the next step toward treating cars like guns would be repealing the 1994 federal "assault weapon" ban and its analogs in California, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and a few other jurisdictions. So-called assault weapons are actually ordinary guns that fire just one bullet each time the trigger is pressed, but they happen to look like machine guns. just as we don't ban powerful Porsches (which actually can go very fast), we don't ban less-powerful vehicles that simply look like high-performance cars. Likewise, we don't ban autos because they are underpowered, or because they're made with low-quality metal. If you want a Yugo, you can buy one. So the state-level bans on inexpensive guns (a.k.a. "junk guns" or "Saturday night specials") will have to go, along with the federal rules against the import of cheap guns. Also slated for elimination under the treat-cars-like-guns rule are thousands of laws regulating the purchase of firearms and their possession on private property. The simple purchase of an automobile is subject to essentially no restrictions. When you show up at the dealer's showroom, he will not conduct a background check to find out if you have a conviction for vehicular homicide, or if you've been arrested for drunk driving, or even if you have a driver's license. All you need is money. The only "waiting period" to buy a car runs from the time you pay for it (with cash, a certified check, or a loan document) to the time the salesman hands you the keys. This waiting period tends to run from 30 seconds to five minutes. In contrast, firearms are the only product in this country for which FBI permission (via the national background check) is required for every single retail purchase. If you keep your automobile on private property, there are virtually no restrictions. Even though your driver's license was revoked last week, you can drive your Jeep on your ranch as much as you want. Indeed, you can drink a case of beer before you go driving around your ranch, and enjoy the ride knowing that you are not violating a single law. (Of course, if any form of negligent or reckless conduct with your auto on your own property results in injury to an innocent person or to someone else's property, you will be financially responsible, and you may be prosecuted for violating laws against reckless endangerment.) T hus, we can get rid of all the laws concerning gun storage in the home, together with the laws that ban possession of guns by various persons on private property. Current federal law outlaws gun possession, on private as well as public property, by anyone who has ever been convicted of a felony (even a nonviolent one), anyone with a misdemeanor involving domestic violence (such as two brothers who had a fistfight on their front lawn 30 years ago), anyone who has been dishonorably discharged from the military, any alcoholic, any illegal drug user (defined by regulation as anyone who has used drugs in the last year), any illegal alien, and various other "prohibited persons." Some states, such as Massachusetts, go even further, making all gun possession presumptively illegal, except for persons with special licenses. Once we really treat guns like cars, all of these laws will be swept away. Most cities do prohibit property owners from storing their cars in an unsightly manner (say, on cinder blocks in the front yard), or from parking too many cars on the public street in front of their homes. Fair enough. Gun owners will have to accept laws against leaving nonfunctional guns strewn about th eir front yard, and they will not be allowed to leave excessive numbers of guns on the street. (Anti-gun groups frequently compla in that there are "too many guns on the street.") If you have a car on your own property, you can hitch it to a trailer, have it pulled to someone else's property, and drive the car on his property (assuming you have his per- mission). As long as your car is just being towed, you don't need a driver's license or plates. Thus, gun owners should be allowed to transport their unloaded guns to private property (a shooting gallery, for example) for use on that property. jurisdictions such as New York City would no longer have the power to require a separate "target permit" just to take a gun to the local pistol range. But now suppose that you want to use your car on public property, such as a street or an old logging trail in a national forest. Then a licensing system does come into play--but only because the car will be used in public. For a license that allows you to drive a car anywhere in public, most states require that you 1) be at least 15 or 16 years old; 2) take a written safety test that requires an IQ of no more than 75 to pass; and 3) show an examiner that you know how to operate a car and how to obey basic safety rules and traffic signs. Your license may be revoked or suspended if, while driving in public, you violate certain safety rules or cause an accident. Except in egregious cases (such as killing someone while driving with extreme recklessness), first or second offenses do not usually result in license revocations. Once the driver's license is issued, it is good in every state of the union. These driver's license requirements seem to be what Gore has in mind for handguns, although he fails to recognize that the requirements apply only to cars used in public, not cars possessed in pri- vate. The vice president's mistake is under- standable, given his lack of driving experience in the years since the taxpayers have been paying for his full-time chauffeur. In July, Gore warned that the 2000 election is "no time to take a far-right U-turn." He apparently did not realize that on American roads, it is impossible to make a U-turn to the right. The guns-like-cars licensing system touted by Gore is already in effect in 30 states, where adults with a clean record can obtain a permit to carry a concealed hand- gun for lawful protection. (Vermont requires no permit.) Making the concealed handgun licensing system exactly like the driver licensing system would involve a few tweaks, namely: 1) reducing the minimum age for a license (21 or 25 in most states); 2) reducing the fees (which can run over $100 in many states); 3) mandating a written exam in the minority of states that do not currently have one; 4) adding a practical demonstration test, which no state currently has; and 5) making the licenses valid everywhere, instead of just in the issuing state. And of course, the 19 states that currently don't give handgun carry permits to every person with a clean record would have to change their laws. A few states already require licensees to register one or two specific guns that will be carried. Under the treatguns-like-cars rule, every gun carried in public would have to be registered, and the owner would have to pay an annual or semiannual registration tax. Th e registration would also apply to hunting or target shooting guns used on public lands. Once you get a driver's license, you can drive your car anywhere that is open to the public. Thus, we will have to repeal all the laws against carrying guns within 1,000 feet of a school, or in bars, or on government property. Although legislative bodies regulate gun design(through laws banning machine guns, "assault weapon s," and inexpensive guns), no federal agency has the authority to impose new design standards on firearms. In contrast, federal regulators do impose a wide variety of safety rules on automobiles. Some of these rules, such as mandatory passenger-side air bags, end up killing people. So the one major way in which treating guns like cars would lead to more-restrictive gun laws would be to allow federal regulators to impose design mandates on firearms. Some of these regulations will, like automobile safety rules, cause the deaths of innocent people. Certain kinds of trigger locks, for example, can cause a loaded gun to fire when it is dropped, and a "magazine disconnect" can prevent a gun owner from firing his weapon when he is attacked. But if we accept death from regulation for cars, then perhaps we will have to accept it for guns as well. Faced with the prospect of really treating guns like cars, gun prohibitionists tend to change their minds. They begin arguing that there are important differences in dangerousness between guns and cars. This is true. Cars are much more danger ous. The Independence Institute's Robert Racansky points out that in 1994 (the last year for which data are available), there were 32 auto deaths for every 100,000 autos in the United States. The same year, there were 16 firearm deaths for every 100,000 firearms in the United States. Put another way, in any given year, the average car is twice as likely as the average gun to cause a death. And more than 95 percent of gun deaths are intentional (suicide or homicide), while most auto deaths are accidents. This shows how dangerous cars really are: They are twice as likely to kill as guns are, even though the killer behind the wheel does not intend to take a life. Plus, most people who die from guns are suicides who choose to die, but almost none of the people who die in car crashes choose to die. Another argument against treating guns like cars, of course, is that gun ownership is explicitly protected by the U.S. Constitution and by 44 state constitutions, while car ownership has no such special status. On the other hand, if the groups that call for treating guns like cars followed their own advice, they would immediately disband. There are no major Washington lobby groups arguing that people should be able to buy a car only if the government decides they need one, or that people should use only public transportation, instead of private vehicles, during life-threatening emergencies. Yet Handgun Control Inc.'s Sarah Brady favors "needs-based licensing" for firearms. "To me," she told the Tampa Tribune, "the only reason for guns in civilian hands is for sporting purposes." In response to the question of whether there are legitimate reasons for owning a hand- gun, Brady's husband and fellow anti-gun activist, Jim Brady, told Parade magazine: "For target shooting, that's OK. Get a license and go to the range. For defense of the home, that's why we have police departments" Even if the anti-gun groups did not disband, they would have to change their style dramatically. People who own cars, and who belong to pro-car lobbying groups (such as the American Automobile Association), are treated respectfully by those who disagree with them. They are not routinely denounced when a criminal with a car kills someone. A few days after the Columbine High School murders last April, Steve Abrams deliberately drove his Cadillac onto a play- ground in Costa Mesa, California, killing a 3-year-old and a 4-year-old. No one showed up on television to claim that General Motors, car owners in general, or anyone other than Steve Abrams was responsible for this crime. Politicians did not try to use Abrams' murderous act to cre- ate a campaign issue or stir up support for restrictions on law-abiding car owners. If gun owners were treated like car owners, they would not be vilified by smug moral imperialists with the energetic assistance of the president and most of the national news media. Sad to say, that would be progress. David B. Kopel (davekopel@hotmail.com), research director at the Independence Institute in Golden, Colorado, (i2i.org) is the editor of Guns: Who Should Have Them! (Promethetls). Reason Magazine November 1999 [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RKBA! - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - - ------------------------------ End of roc-digest V2 #288 *************************