From: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com (roc-digest) To: roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: roc-digest V2 #305 Reply-To: roc-digest Sender: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk roc-digest Saturday, December 18 1999 Volume 02 : Number 305 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 5 Dec 99 09:28:14 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Gun Show poll- we're loosing (fwd) On Dec 4, scott401@pop.usit.net wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] Another poll @ http://today.about.com/blpoll.htm Scott "I really do know alot. I just forget it alot of times." Sam, age 7 [------------------------- 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, 06 Dec 1999 23:00:28 -0600 From: Joe Sylvester Subject: Gas masks don't kill people... The right to bear arms Joseph Farah WND http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_btl/19991206_xcbtl_the_ri ght_.shtml There's a reason the Founding Fathers considered the right to bear arms fundamental in a free society. A couple of recent unrelated incidents should bring this home to all of us. In Seattle last week, the local government, faced with widespread civil disobedience over the city's hosting of the World Trade Organization conference declared a state of emergency, a curfew and even went so far as to ban the use of gas masks by anyone except police. Now, in case you hadn't considered this before, gas masks are not weapons. They can only be used to defend oneself, usually from tear gas fired by government police. Now imagine you lived in Seattle and had some urgent business. Perhaps you have an asthmatic son or daughter with a doctor's appointment. You live outside the immediate area of protests, but as a precaution against what could be a life-threatening attack to your child, you feel compelled to break out the gas mask collecting dust in the basement. In Seattle, you would be treated as a criminal. It's arbitrary. It's capricious. And I say it's unconstitutional. And the Constitution doesn't even explicitly guarantee the right to bear strictly defensive tools such as a gas mask. I think many, if not most, people -- left and right -- would agree with me. Nevertheless, there is still, somehow broad debate in this country about whether the Constitution really means what it says about firearms. I don't get it. Some of the anti-gun, anti-Constitution, anti-freedom crowd looks at it this way: "Yeah, it's in the Constitution. But the Constitution is outdated and in need of change -- especially the Second Amendment. Our first priority needs to be to protect people from violence. If we take the guns away from ordinary people, they will be safer and more secure. They can rest easy knowing the government will protect them." Of course, the facts, the statistics, the evidence just doesn't bear out any such theory. On the contrary, the only cold, calculating, objective, scientific research conducted in this area, by Dr. John Lott, shows just the opposite to be the case -- more guns mean less crime. But put that aside for a moment and consider a recent development in a police shooting case in Claremont, Calif. Last January, Irvin Landrum Jr., 18, was stopped for a traffic violation. The cops say Landrum pulled a gun on them, so they shot him and killed him. The family never bought the story and filed a lawsuit suggesting the police shot the kid and planted a gun on him. It turns out ballistics tests showed the gun was not fired that night. It had no fingerprints on it. And the last traceable owner was the late police chief of a neighboring town. I don't know about you, but I believe the kid was shot three times by the cops and the .45 was dropped on him. It happens. You see, some cops are crooked. Some cops are dishonest. Some cops are even unbalanced, untrustworthy and unqualified to carry a gun. And even more of them are unsuited to that role if and when the police hold a monopoly on firepower. When some nut climbs a tower somewhere and shoots innocent people, too many Americans begin clamoring to take away guns from perfectly law-abiding citizens who need them to protect themselves as well as to protect our own liberty from the creeping police state. When a nutty cop goes berserk and kills innocent people -- and it happens -- I never hear anyone suggesting we disarm all police. True self-government requires an armed citizenry. If the government holds a monopoly on force, tyranny is only a shot away. We can never allow that to happen in America. Nor can we ever tolerate American city governments, state governments or federal government suspending the constitutional rights of free people. The WTO be damned. Let the organization meet in China. Let it hire its own private security force to protect Fidel Castro and Bill Clinton. We shouldn't suspend the Constitution to protect people who would like to shred it permanently. Remember, gas masks don't kill people. Overbearing, unchecked, heavily armed governments kill people. The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution. ---Doug McKay" Joe Sylvester Don't Tread On Me ! - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Dec 99 21:27:50 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: [slickplus] HUMOR: Name that House (fwd) On Dec 6, RichSlick@aol.com wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] In a message dated 12/6/1999 12:44:40 PM Central Standard Time, BOBWORN@aol.com writes: << What should be the official name for Bill & Hillary's New York abode? There were lots of possibilities, according to the creative audience of The Jayne Carroll Show, a political talk radio program which airs daily in the Portland, Oregon, metropolitan area. On Friday, September 10th, Carroll asked her audience to come up with an official name for the Clinton $1.7 million house in Chappaqua, New York. Carroll's call-in contest required the names to be in relative good taste, original, and should capture the essence of one or both of the Clintons. The response was overwhelming! Some names nominated for the Clinton's new home included: Perjurers' Palace HillBilly Villa The House of Bill Repute Drawers Downs Cheatem Estates Castle of Contempt Sin Simeon The House That Terry Bought The Knee Pad The White Trash House The Blight House The Panderosa Liars' Lair Bill & Hill's Bribe & Breakfast The Clinton Compost Dogpatch on the Hudson Rancho Immoral Deceitful Domicile Monica's Man's Manor The Hen House The Out House The Big House The Love Shack Lucifer's Lair House of the Rising Son The House of Seven Felonies Cottage of Contempt Motel Sex But the clear, hands-down winner was- DISGRACELAND >> - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ To subscribe to the Slick e-zine, send e-mail to RichSlick@aol.com for details. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Was the salesman clueless? Productopia has the answers. http://clickhere.egroups.com/click/1702 - -- Talk to your group with your own voice! - -- http://www.egroups.com/VoiceChatPage?listName=slickplus&m=1 [------------------------- 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, 7 Dec 99 23:15:50 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: White House Joins Suit on Gun Cos. (fwd) On Dec 7, R. Lunn wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] >From today's Washington Post http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/aponline/19991207/aponline205420_000.htm - ------ White House Joins Suit on Gun Cos. By Anne Gearan Associated Press Writer Tuesday, Dec. 7, 1999; 8:54 p.m. EST WASHINGTON The White House is helping prepare a class-action suit against gun makers, alleging that guns and how they are marketed have contributed to violence in public housing projects, administration officials said Tuesday. The class-action lawsuit by some or all of the nation's 3,100 local housing authorities would be patterned on suits filed against the industry by 29 cities and counties, the officials said. Those suits claim that gun manufacturers have sold defective products or marketed them in ways that increase the likelihood that they will fall into the hands of criminals. The new legal effort was made known Tuesday and was described by some officials as more of a threat aimed at bringing gun manufacturers to the negotiating table than an effort to take them to court. The administration hopes the threat of a national lawsuit will force gun makers to agree to end practices such as marketing guns that are impervious to fingerprints. A negotiated agreement would allow the administration and gun control advocates to claim a victory at a time when Congress has rejected writing into law new firearms restrictions wanted by President Clinton. "The administration intends to work aggressively to ... try to work to reach a settlement with the industry," White House domestic policy adviser Bruce Reed said. "If settlement is not possible, then the public housing authorities are prepared to go forward with their suit." Administration officials said the White House and the Department of Housing and Urban Development are helping prepare the suit even though the actual plaintiff would be independent local authorities that run federal housing programs. The White House and HUD want gun makers to agree to a code of conduct that includes cracking down on disreputable gun dealers and making safer guns. "The legal theory is the same as the cities have been pursuing the bottom line is the gun manufacturers have not been properly supervising their distribution channels," and otherwise failing to promote safety, a HUD official said. "It's the traditional liability theory that is applied to every other product negligence and product liability," the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity. The official would not detail any previous outreach to gun makers but said new negotiations were planned. "The administration and HUD is ready to sue, but our first priority is to change the practice of the industry. We think we should first sit down at the negotiating table," the HUD official said. Some gun makers have declared bankruptcy in the wake of the suits by local governments and others have downsized their product lines and decreased advertising, according to a countersuit. The suits have had mixed success in the courts. A judge dismissed Cincinnati's suit in October but another judge had allowed Atlanta's suit to proceed and ordered the industry to open its files. Copyright 1999 The Associated Press - ----------------------- NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, 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. - ----------------------- [------------------------- 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, 7 Dec 99 23:16:40 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Re: White House Joins Suit on Gun Cos. (fwd) On Dec 7, Chris BeHanna wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] On 7 Dec 99, at 22:00, R. Lunn wrote: > From today's Washington Post > > http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/aponline/19991207/aponline205420_000.htm > > ------ > > White House Joins Suit on Gun Cos. > By Anne Gearan > Associated Press Writer > Tuesday, Dec. 7, 1999; 8:54 p.m. EST > > WASHINGTON The White House is helping prepare a class-action suit against > gun makers, alleging that guns and how they are marketed have contributed > to violence in public housing projects, administration officials said > Tuesday. Write your Senators and Congressman. There have been no appropriations made to pay for this action, which Congress has *NOT* authorized. The action is illegal, and in the next session, Congress must quickly write into law a proscription against using federal funds for such activities. I don't know if that will actually do any good, but hey--we *did* get the NCIPC defunded, didn't we? Chris BeHanna behanna@fast.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: Wed, 08 Dec 1999 12:46:04 -0800 From: boyd@seanet.com Subject: Re: White House Joins Suit on Gun Cos. (fwd) Good idea. We should note however that the title isn't exactly accurate here. The president has "promised" to "join the states" in february or march if the gun manufactures dont "stop there..." blah blah blah. We surely must pressure our "leaders" to stop this unethical use of our money against us, this blackmail really, but at the same time lets write to the manufacturers urging them not to fall to this blackmail. Many of them may see the tremendous legal resources of the federal government lining up against them and decide that the smart business move is to take cover by leaping to the whim of these "leaders" (and I'm assuming you all are inserting the appropriate language when I type "leaders" ; ) We must impress on the manufacturers that the civillian market with reward them with _Ca$h_ if they hang in there, they have to be made to know that seeking refuge from the litigious behemoth may seem like a good business move short term but that it will not end at this round. If you can, now's a -great- time to buy a new gun. Make a copy of the receipt and send the manufacturer a -thank-you- note for persuing a business that has been unfairly under attack. With that thank you note, urge them to stand up for the long term interests of their market and not knuckle under even to the financial pressure of our rogue "leaders". These guys need our support, money talks. -Boyd Kneeland Bill Vance wrote: > > On Dec 7, Chris BeHanna wrote: > > [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] > > On 7 Dec 99, at 22:00, R. Lunn wrote: > > > From today's Washington Post > > > > http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/aponline/19991207/aponline205420_000.htm > > > > ------ > > > > White House Joins Suit on Gun Cos. > > By Anne Gearan > > Associated Press Writer > > Tuesday, Dec. 7, 1999; 8:54 p.m. EST > > > > WASHINGTON The White House is helping prepare a class-action suit against > > gun makers, alleging that guns and how they are marketed have contributed > > to violence in public housing projects, administration officials said > > Tuesday. > > Write your Senators and Congressman. There have been no > appropriations made to pay for this action, which Congress has *NOT* > authorized. The action is illegal, and in the next session, Congress > must quickly write into law a proscription against using federal > funds for such activities. > > I don't know if that will actually do any good, but hey--we *did* > get the NCIPC defunded, didn't we? > > Chris BeHanna > behanna@fast.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: Sat, 18 Dec 99 20:38:03 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Heads Up #163 (1/2) (fwd) On Dec 18, Doug Fiedor wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] Heads Up A Weekly View from the Foothills of Appalachia December 19, 1999 #163 by: Doug Fiedor fiedor19@eos.net - --------------------------------------------------------------------- Previous Editions at: http://www.uhuh.com/reports/headsup/list-hu.htm - --------------------------------------------------------------------- LIBERALS CONTROL GOP PRIMARY It's time we publicly chastise the far left, big government loving liberals in the media for even discussing conservative candidates. The liberals violated the Republican primary yet again when very liberal Tom Brokaw and some local dude from Iowa's WHO station played "moderators" for last Monday's Republican debate. What's the deal here? Have Republicans no pride, or what? In a country of 270 million people they can't find moderators who are Republican and know the issues under discussion? What a shame! Worse, it seems that maybe the only national media people in the nation who noticed the disparity were at The National Review: "Their preening was sickening -- one can see why Brokaw's station logo is a peacock -- and their questions were both the worst and the most left-wing in tendency of all three debates." The liberals should question and comment on their own candidates. Those in the liberal media don't know enough about Constitutional issues to even be in the same room with the likes of Alan Keyes and Steve Forbes. And their stupid, left-handed questions corrupt the issues we wish to hear discussed with candidates like George W. Bush and Gary Bauer. Better the media liberals stick with candidates they are supporting, like John McCain, Al Gore and Bill Bradley. It appears that Gary Bauer is starting to run from both the far right and the left simultaneously. During one debate, Bauer was asked what he would do if, as president, he could do only one thing to benefit the people of the United States. He blew it badly with his Johnny One Note message on banning abortion. The correct answer, the answer millions of American people want to hear from a candidate is simple: "I want to restore a Constitutional form of government so as to protect all rights and liberties of all Americans equally." Duh! However, that type of answer evidently did (does) not occur to Bauer. Now, he's talking about Europe's socialist agriculture policy as a model for America. Yes, we need to do something to revive failing family farms in this country. But, one answer is to get the federal government completely out of the issue. More government intrusion will only harm more family farms. Last week, Alan Keyes preempted Bauer on the abortion issue with one simple statement: "We are not 'leaving unborn children behind.' We are killing them!" There just isn't much more to discuss on the issue after that remark. Folks are now holding George W. Bush to a higher standard. That's expected. He peaked way too early and, as we suggested months ago would happen, as soon as he started actually talking about real issues his acceptance numbers would drop back down to reality. Besides, Bush will never look good as long as the idea man Steve Forbes is standing on one side of him and the Constitutional cheerleader Alan Keyes is putting everything into its proper prospective on his other side. Orrin Hatch is just joking around. The campaign is but an ego trip for Hatch. He'll continue playing the role of conservative candidate until the Senate goes back in session. Then, it's back to playing his half of the Odd Couple with Ted Kennedy. Gary Bauer and Orrin Hatch can drop out anytime. No one will mind. For some reason, the big topic at the Iowa debate was the ethanol subsidies. It's interesting how that lined up: Bush for, McCain against. That was probably McCain's only Constitutionally correct point in the three debates. Government should not be subsidizing ethanol. However, we doubt very much that McCain was against subsidies for Constitutional reasons. Campaign contribution reasons would be more like it. The liberal media supports McCain, so it's no surprise they report that he's doing well. However, the people who were able to watch the debate on that little cable cannel didn't see it quite the same way. For instance, Vote.com showed that 42% thought Alan Keyes won versus only 12% for John McCain. Bush was second with a strong 39%, Forbes with 3%, Hatch with 2%, and Bauer with only one percent of the vote. If we continue to allow the liberal media to define our candidates, the primary race will be between Bush and McCain. However, if our personal freedom and liberty -- and that of our children and grandchildren -- hold any importance to us, we have the power to force the issue and support a primary runoff between Keyes and Forbes. Both will defend our Constitution against the socialist usurpers of liberty, albeit Keyes a little more classically than Forbes. Whatever we plan to do, these next four to six weeks is the time to get it done. It's time to make some real noise and get the liberal media out of the equation for Republican candidates. CHOOSING A PRESIDENT -- KEYES This guy doesn't just "reply" to a question, he "launches" a righteous rant with every answer. So much so, in fact, that if conviction, honesty and passion of beliefs were the criteria for electing a president, this candidate stands out so far in front of the Republican pack there would be no other choice. However, the national media finds two major faults with this candidate: First, he can think on his feet and his mental capacity far exceeds that of the professional news readers trying to trip him up in an interview. And second, Alan L. Keyes is a Black man who comes nowhere near the stereotype the liberal media expects of an American citizen who is Black. Besides, the liberal national media have no idea how to handle a candidate who preaches ethics, personal responsibility and morals. Because, the problem is that his arguments are correct and Constitutionally based. They realize that any media person publicly challenging him will be hit with a quickly enunciated tirade of self-evident truths that would have them cowering like the uninformed fools many of them are. Therefore, most of the national media people actually fear Alan Keyes and do their best to stay away from him. The liberal national media cannot handle Constitutional truths any better than they can respond to strong moral convictions, and Alan Keyes brings both to the table. Loudly. And with great passion. Keyes called his radio show "America's Wake Up Call." In reality, his campaign is America's wake up call. That is, it would be if the liberals in the national media would give the Keyes platform recognition. The guy is a cheerleader for the ideals expressed by this country's Founding Fathers. The intensity of his style is not only fun to watch, his words have a very significant meaning. His message is seldom expressed in this county's national forum anymore: Government should follow the Constitution and we should teach kids individualism, morals and integrity, rather than the liberal collectivism claptrap. Gee, what a concept! Keyes launches on affirmative action by saying that instead of "calling on government to enforce the fundamental principle that all men are created equal, today's civil rights movement favors preferential treatment for groups defined by race or sex. We cannot cure injustice with another injustice," Keyes admonishes. Keyes says that he is "a strong supporter of the Second Amendment." The Second Amendment "was not put into the Constitution by the Founders merely to allow us to intimidate burglars, or hunt rabbits to our hearts' content. Above all, the Founders added the Second Amendment so that when, after a long train of abuses, a government evinces a methodical design upon our natural rights, we will have the means to protect and recover our rights. That is why the right to keep and bear arms was included in the Bill of Rights." On government schools and school choice, Keyes scores a bullseye again: "The value-free education offered by the government run schools has all too often proven to be education without value. This is especially true now that Outcome Based Education has been used as an excuse to establish curricular elements that amount to the politically correct brainwashing of our children." Calling for a revamping of the whole federal tax structure, Keyes says that tyrannical taxation and excessive government spending and borrowing "erode the resource base of our freedom and our moral responsibility. The income tax is a twentieth-century socialist experiment and it has failed. Before the income tax was imposed on us just 80 years ago, government had no claim to our income; only sales, excise and tariff taxes were allowed. We need to return to the Constitution of economic liberty that our Founders intended to be a permanent bulwark of our political liberty. The income tax in effect makes us vassals to the government -- the politicians decide how much income we can keep." For a campaign finance fix that would go far to stymie the power of Washington's $8.4 billion annual special interest lobbying industry, Keyes offers a simple solution: "No dollar vote without a ballot vote." He is also the only candidate to see the major problems cause by the liberal Great Society welfare programs: "Most of our expensive government welfare programs aim to deal with problems that are related to the breakdown of moral standards and self-discipline. Our first priority should be restoring the moral and material support for the marriage-based two-parent family. The disintegration of the family is the major contributing factor in poverty, crime, violence, the decline in educational performance, and a host of other expensive social problems." Chuck Muth, Chairman of the Nevada Republican Liberty Caucus, aptly described what many Republicans thought Monday night after the Iowa debate: "I don't care [------------------------- 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: Sat, 18 Dec 99 20:37:07 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Heads Up #163 (2/2) (fwd) On Dec 18, Doug Fiedor wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] if the guy can win or not, his presence on that stage raises the intellectual level of the entire discussion ... and the entire primary contest ... a hundred fold." And, talk about cleaning up government; last week Keyes named his choice for Attorney General: "I think that we need to put someone in as Attorney General who, among other things, will enforce the law and then get to the truth on behalf of the American people and there's nobody that has been doing that with greater courage and effectiveness -- even without any kind of official position -- than [Judicial Watch's] Larry Klayman." Talk about fun to watch! A Keyes administration with Larry Klayman as Attorney General would start right in cleaning up the corrupt Washington scene. A couple years of that would also set the process of American socialism back 50 years. The "Third Way" would go away. Anyone interested in their own personal freedom and liberty, Constitutional issues and the original American way that made this country so great, should pay close attention to the Keyes campaign. Alan Keyes' delivery is both passionate and intense for a good reason: He firmly believes what he is saying. For more information, go to http://www.keyes2000.org. Because, you are not likely to hear a lot about the platform of Alan L. Keyes from the liberal media. PRIVACY SHALL NOT BE VIOLATED When reading through the Federalist Papers and other writings of the Founding Fathers, one soon realizes that one of the primary reasons the federal government was formed was to protect the life, liberty and property of the American people. So, what do we do when it's government violating our rights? For instance, the police have a common trick called no-knock search. Except, one inconvenient fact is that The Fourth Amendment still states that: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." So, any government official wanting to conduct an investigation that includes the search of private property needs to first do a few things. Initially, there must be some sort of probable cause that a crime has been committed, or is in progress. Then, there must be some sort of proof leading to that reasoning. That being true, the officer must then visit a judge and present enough information to justify a search warrant. That last part should be difficult. But, because judges and prosecutors have immunity for all errors in judgment and cannot be charged with even the most blatant malpractice, some judges do not pay attention and will sign anything put in front of them. Therefore, the United States Supreme Court has attempted to set some rules concerning searches. For instance, in Wilson vs. Arkansas (94-5707, 1995), the Supreme Court again held that "the common law knock and announce principle forms a part of the Fourth Amendment reasonableness inquiry," as the Founding Fathers intended. "In evaluating the scope of the constitutional right to be secure in one's house, this Court has looked to the traditional protections against unreasonable searches and seizures afforded by the common law at the time of the framing. Given the longstanding common law endorsement of the practice of announcement, and the wealth of founding era commentaries, constitutional provisions, statutes, and cases espousing or supporting the knock and announce principle, this Court has little doubt that the Amendment's Framers thought that whether officers announced their presence and authority before entering a dwelling was among the factors to be considered in assessing a search's reasonableness. Nevertheless, the common law principle was never stated as an inflexible rule requiring announcement under all circumstances. Countervailing law enforcement interests -- including, e.g., the threat of physical harm to police, the fact that an officer is pursuing a recently escaped arrestee, and the existence of reason to believe that evidence would likely be destroyed if advance notice were given -- may establish the reasonableness of an unannounced entry." They forgot about physical harm to others in immediate danger, but whatever. Anyway, this was the standard until Richards vs. Wisconsin (96-5955, 1997) came around, when the Court started muddying the waters a little yet again. "If a per se exception were allowed for each criminal activity category that included a considerable risk of danger to officers or destruction of evidence, the knock and announce requirement would be meaningless. The court confronted with the question in each case has a duty to determine whether the facts and circumstances of the particular entry justified dispensing with the requirement. A 'no knock' entry is justified when the police have a reasonable suspicion that knocking and announcing their presence, under the particular circumstances, would be dangerous or futile, or that it would inhibit the effective investigation of the crime. This standard strikes the appropriate balance between the legitimate law enforcement concerns at issue in the execution of search warrants and the individual privacy interests affected by no knock entries." In truth, there should never be an excuse for a no knock entry of private property unless innocent lives are in jeopardy. One only needs to read the dozens of press accounts of innocent people being killed by police pulling their dynamic entries this past year to see why. Does the possibility of missing a conviction because a perpetrator might flush a little drug evidence override the protection of the privacy of innocent people? How about the lives of innocent people then? The words "shall not" in the Fourth Amendment must not be violated. No knock warrants got too many innocent people killed this year. It's time government officials -- from judges to police officers -- be held directly responsible for this type of negligence. EPA ENACTS KYOTO ACCORD By: Craig M. Brown DebMcB@worldnet.att.net With zero chance for Senate ratification, the EPA is using sleight of hand to push the Kyoto Treaty through the back boor. Did anybody really think that the U.S. Constitution, the law of the land, would prevent Carol Browner and the EPA from attempting to grasp control over industry, the economy and virtually every facet of our lives? Now the EPA is using smoke and mirrors to create the impression that the Clean Air Act gives them the power to regulate CO2 emissions. The fact that the Clean Air Act says nothing about regulating carbon dioxide emissions is of little concern to the EPA. The fatal flaw of the Clean Air Act is the vague language in the act itself. It invites the EPA or anybody else to interpret it any way it finds convenient. In recent years, the "scientists" at the EPA have determined that carbon dioxide is a pollutant and part of the so-called "greenhouse gasses" that are destroying our planet. In April, 1998, EPA General Counsel Jonathan Z. Cannon advised that the Clean Air Act granted the EPA the power to regulate emissions of CO2. That was all the EPA needed to set them off on another power grab. Out came a new set of EPA compliance standards aimed at regulating the hated CO2 emissions. This covers power plants, manufacturing, agriculture and transportation of all types. It also includes the air we exhale, although the EPA has not as yet released their plans to control breathing. In cities and towns across the country, centralized emissions testing sites have sprouted up with mandates that all vehicles be tested for compliance to emissions standards. If the states or communities balk at complying with these mandates, they are threatened with federal sanctions and withholding of highway funds. The sad thing is that the fear of losing highway funds causes many communities to fold and bow down. A few states, such as Maine, Minnesota, Michigan, Virginia, Louisiana and Texas have called the EPA's bluff and refused to comply with centralized testing. The Heritage Foundation and the National Motorists Association have tracked punitive action by the EPA and have found no instances in which highway funds have actually been withheld. In spite of the Gestapo-like tactics of the EPA, Congress has been strangely silent about the abuses being inflicted on their constituents. Each year, instead of de-funding the EPA, Congress keeps giving them additional money. One reason Congress permits the EPA to go its own way is the fear of demagoguery by special interest groups that support the EPA and the Kyoto Treaty. All it takes is for Al Gore or his useful idiots in the media to mumble something like Senator So-and-So wants to poison the air and the Senator runs for the hills. With courage such as this, is it any wonder why we are losing our freedom? Indeed, the irony of this is that these special interest groups such as the Sierra Club and Green Peace are being supported by grants from the EPA of taxpayer money. This money is in turn used to pay lobbyists to support the EPA. This is illegal, but Ms. Browner and her friends can't be bothered by legalities. As this millennium comes to a close, a major battle between the movement toward the New World Order and the sovereignty of the United States is coming to a head. The Clinton administration is determined to implement the Kyoto Treaty one way or another. One way he has chosen is by giving the EPA nearly unlimited power over all of us. But the Constitution of the United States is a stronger document than many of its enemies understand. Its presence gives strength to those of us who would preserve this country for the next thousand years. In the final minutes of this millennium, set aside some time to give thanks to what we have preserved of the freedom for which our forefathers sacrificed so much, and what we can do to persuade our representatives at all levels to reclaim some of what we have lost. ~ End ~ [------------------------- 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 #305 *************************