From: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com (roc-digest) To: roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: roc-digest V2 #325 Reply-To: roc-digest Sender: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk roc-digest Monday, April 10 2000 Volume 02 : Number 325 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 3 Apr 00 22:32:04 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: VIN -- the polecats ball (fwd) On Apr 4, richslick@aol.com wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] From: Vin_Suprynowicz@lvrj.com (Vin Suprynowicz) FROM MOUNTAIN MEDIA THE LIBERTARIAN, By Vin Suprynowicz The polecats ball The President of the United States is coming to Las Vegas this weekend. It's traditional for citizens to turn out and honor a fellow entrusted with so high an office. But what's an appropriate way to honor Bill Clinton? What would a man of honor do if publicly accused of ripping open the blouse of a grieving widow and fondling her breasts when she came to ask for a job -- and then conspiring to leak confidential letters from her government file to discredit her when she went public? What would a man of honor do if publicly accused of having an armed policeman bring a subordinate to him in a motel room so he could drop his pants and ask the startled young woman to "kiss it"; of pushing another woman of casual acquaintance down on a couch during a real estate tour and raping her (on the way out, famously smiling and advising her to "put some ice on that"); of committing murder by bombing foreign countries with which we were not at war merely to push his own embarrassing sexual escapades from the headlines; and then of a consistent and massive ongoing campaign of character assassination -- using the powers of his office to intimidate any and all such women and their families into silence, even if that required violating the 1974 Privacy Act, enacted specifically to ban the use of White House files for such purposes? The honorable man, of course, would rise up in righteous fury and demand his day in court at the earliest possible moment, in order to clear his name. Instead, the seven years of the Clinton administration have consisted of little but a full-court press of procrastination, using every tactic the legal weasels could dream up to stymie, dodge, drag out, frustrate, block and delay any legitimate inquiry into this pattern of behavior -- up to and including wagging that finger and lying to the entire nation on live TV. (What would Monica Lewinsky's reputation for truth-telling be today, were it not for one slightly soiled blue dress? The president's agents are still lying about having confidentially briefed the press, in those early days, calling her "a stalker kind of person.") As to those who support and apologize for the Creature-in-Chief, helping him deflect all accusations back at his critics: I believe the current term is "enablers." Now, the first lady -- who doesn't seem to travel with the president much, any more -- famously said all these charges were merely invented by a "vast right-wing conspiracy, out to get my husband since the day he was elected." But the Justice Department has just launched a criminal investigation into charges the White House conspired to hide vast quantities of subpoenaed e-mail from congressional investigators. How about that Attorney General Janet Reno (who last week also admitted under oath the FBI had no authorization from her to use tanks to demolish the back end of the Mount Carmel Church in Waco in 1993, nor to hold fire engines away from the scene as dozens of innocent women and children were incinerated): she part of Mrs. Clinton's "vast right-wing conspiracy"? Six Northrup-Grumman employees who worked under White House contract now testify before Congress they were ordered not to tell anyone about the missing Lewinsky e-mails; Betty Lambuth, the on-site Northrup manager, testified a White Official told her if anyone talked "We would lose our jobs, be arrested and put in jail." Betty Lambuth -- newest member of that "vast right-wing conspiracy"? U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth just ruled that Bill Clinton "committed a criminal violation of the Privacy Act" by releasing personal letters to undermine the credibility of one of his accusers, Kathleen Willey -- the aforementioned bereaved job applicant who later re-buttoned her blouse and tearfully accused Clinton of unwanted sexual advances. No beating around the bush, there. The president "committed a criminal violation." Federal Judge Royce Lamberth: another member of the "vast right-wing conspiracy"? This is the second federal judge who's found Bill Clinton guilty of violating the very law he's sworn to enforce, of course. A federal judge in Arkansas first found him guilty of committing perjury in federal court and fined him $90,000. Just another member of the "vast right-wing conspiracy"? Chuck Colson, a Nixon aide, went to prison for two years for misusing a single FBI file. The Clintons gathered up hundreds, retaining thick-necked barroom bouncers to pore through them searching for leakable information to use against their political opponents. Mr. Clinton's punishment? The onetime law school professor (well, it was in Arkansas, you understand) could eventually find himself disbarred in his home state -- but has asked if they'll kindly put off that inquiry for, you know, another year or two. Thank goodness Mr. Clinton's heir apparent, easily-led naif Al Gore, who boldly asserts the automobile is destroying the earth, is made of sterner stuff. Caught red-handed using government phones for illegal fund-raising, the vice president merely asserts there is "no compelling legal authority" capable of arresting him for his crimes, and instead now presents himself as the newest champion of "campaign finance reform"! Let's pass some new laws I won't obey, either! Informed last month that a young woman willing to take the fall for his $100,000 in illegal fund-shovelling at the Buddhist Temple is about to go to prison, Mr. Gore acted as though he didn't even recognize the name. How on earth is one to honor the capo of such an administration? Stage a fund-raiser at the Midnight Bunny Ranch? Outdoor barbecue over a roaring fire fed by blazing volumes of the Revised U.S. Code? Personal lubricant to be delivered in 50-gallon drums? In the event, the Democratic faithful are expected to pony up $300,000 this weekend to rub elbows -- or whatever else protrudes -- with the First Rapist at the Green Valley estate of the wealthy real estate heirs of the late Las Vegas newsman Hank Greenspun -- where never a discouraging word will be heard. Then, another $100,000 in tribute is expected to pour forth at a lesser shindig at the digs of former Las Vegas Mayor Jan Jones, who, at least, the downtown casino barons have finally made an honest woman. Some of that money will eventually go to fund the election campaigns of redistributionist political candidates Ed Bernstein and Shelley Berkley, of course -- natives of Philadelphia and New York who will spend much of their share of the booty grinding out folksy TV ads narrated by other people (can't let their own accents be heard), attempting to convince the locals they're true down-home Nevadans of an independent bent, with down-home desert blue-jeans values. And, of course ... Friends of Bill. Applications will also be accepted for a few new Washington internships, I'm told. Though curiously, none of the Greenspun, Jones, Berkley or Bernstein children have yet applied. ... Vin Suprynowicz is assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas Review-Journal. His book, "Send in the Waco Killers: Essays on the Freedom Movement, 1993-1998," is available by dialing 1-800-244-2224; or via web site http://www.thespiritof76.com/wacokillers.html. *** Vin Suprynowicz, vin@lvrj.com "The evils of tyranny are rarely seen but by him who resists it." -- John Hay, 1872 "The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed -- and thus clamorous to be led to safety -- by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." -- H.L. Mencken * * * To subscribe, send a message to vinsends-request@ezlink.com, from your NEW address, including the word "subscribe" (with no quotation marks) in the "Subject" line. All I ask of electronic subscribers is that they not RE-forward my columns until on or after the embargo date which appears at the top of each, and that (should they then choose to do so) they copy the columns in their entirety, preserving the original attribution. The Vinsends list is maintained by Alan Wendt in Colorado, who may be reached directly at alan@ezlink.com. The web sites for the Suprynowicz column are at http://www.infomagic.com/liberty/vinyard.htm, and http://www.nguworld.com/vindex. The Vinyard is maintained by Michael Voth in Flagstaff, who may be reached directly at mvoth@infomagic.com. [------------------------- 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, 4 Apr 00 06:25:04 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: [Fwd: [tgo-l] (fwd) What people should be saying in debates] (fwd) On Apr 04, larry ball wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] Here are some GOOD pro-gun arguments To: p@sneety.insync.net, rrt@sneety.insync.net, al@sneety.insync.net Organization: Horn'd Toad Enterprises RKBA! Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 19:35:06 -0500 From: schuetzen - RKBA! Reply-To: tgo-l@egroups.com Subject: [tgo-l] (fwd) What people should be saying in debates NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed, without profit, for research or educational purposes to those who have expressed a prior interest. "Give It to Them Straight" by John Ross, Author of Unintended Consequences http://www.shotgunnews.com/members/fred/pages/Freds8.html The biggest mistake we make is failing to take the moral high ground on our issue, and letting our enemies define the terms. THEY SAY: "We'd be better off if no one had guns." WE SAY: "You can never succeed at that, criminals will always get guns." (FLAW: The implication here is that if you COULD succeed, it would be a reasonable plan.) WE SHOULD SAY: "So, you want to institute a system where the weak and elderly are at the mercy of the strong, the lone are at the mercy of the gang. You want to give violent criminals a government guarantee that citizens are disarmed. Sorry, that's unacceptable. Better that we should require every citizen to carry a gun." THEY SAY: "Those assault rifles have no sporting purpose. You don't need a 30-round magazine fro hunting deer -- they're only for killing people." WE SAY: "I compete in DCM High Power with my AR-15. You need a large-capacity magazine for their course of fire. My SKS is a fine deer rifle, and I've never done anything to give my government reason not to trust me, blah, blah, blah." (FLAW: You have implicitly conceded that it is OK to ban any gun with no sporting use. And eventually they can replace your sporting arms with arcade-game substitutes.) WE SHOULD SAY: "Your claim that 'they're only for killing people' is imprecise. A gas chamber or electric chair is designed for killing people, and these devices obviously serve different functions than guns. To be precise, a high capacity military-type rifle or handgun is designed for CONFLICT. When I need to protect myself and my freedom, I want the most reliable, most durable, highest capacity weapon possible. The only thing hunting and target shooting have to do with freedom is that they're good practice." THEY SAY: "If we pass this CCW law, it will be like the Wild West, with shoot-outs all the time for fender-benders, in bars, etc. We need to keep guns off the streets. If doing so saves just one life, it will be worth it." WE SAY: "Studies have shown blah blah blah." (flaw: You have implied that if studies showed CCW laws equaled more heat-of-passion shooting, CCW should be illegal. WE SHOULD SAY: "Although no state has experienced what you are describing, that's not important. What is important is our freedom. If saving lives is more important that anything else, why don't we throw out the Fifth amendment? We have the technology to administer an annual truth serum session to the entire population. We'd catch the criminals and mistaken arrest would be a thing of the past. How does that sound?" THEY SAY: "I don't see what the big deal is about a five day waiting period." WE SAY: "It doesn't do any good, criminals don't wait five days, it's a waste of resources blah blah blah." (FLAW: You have implied that if waiting periods DID reduce crime, they would be a good idea.) WHAT WE SHOULD SAY: "How about a 24-hour cooling-off period with a government review board before the news is reported? Wouldn't that prevent lives from being ruined, e.g. Richard Jewell? And the fact that this law applies to people who ALREADY own a handgun tells me that it's not about crime prevention, it's about harassment. Personally, I want to live in a free society, not a 'safe' one with the government as chief nanny." THEY SAY: "In 1776, citizens had muskets. No one ever envisioned these deadly AK-47s. I suppose you think we should all have atomic bombs." WE SAY: "Uh, well, uh . . ." WE SHOULD SAY: "Actually, the Founders discussed this very issue - it's in the Federalist Papers. They wanted the citizens to have the same guns as were the issue weapons of soldiers in a modern infantry. Soldiers in 1776 were each issued muskets, but not the large field pieces with exploding shells. In 1996, soldiers are issued M16s, M249s, etc. but not howitzers and atomic bombs. Furthermore, according to your logic, the laws governing freedom of the press are only valid for newspapers whose presses are hand-operated and use fixed type. After all, no one in 1776 foresaw offset printing or electricity, let alone TV and satellite transmission." THEY SAY: "We require licenses on cars, but the powerful NRA screams bloody murder if anyone ever suggests licensing these weapons of mass destruction." WE SAY: Nothing, usually, and just sit there looking dumb. WE SHOULD SAY: "You know, driving is a luxury, where firearms ownership is a right secured by the Constitution. But let's put that aside for a moment. It's interesting you compared guns and vehicles. Here in the U.S. you can AT ANY AGE go into any state and buy as many motorcycles, cars, or trucks of any size as you want, and you don't need to do anything if you don't use them on public property. If you DO want to use them on public property, you can get a license at age 16. This license is good in all 50 states. NO waiting periods, no background checks, nothing. If we treated guns like cars, a fourteen-year-old could go into any state and legally buy handguns, machine guns, cannons, whatever, cash and carry, and shoot them all with complete legality on private property. And at age 16 he could get a state license good anywhere in the country to shoot these guns on public property." Final comment, useful with most all arguments: YOU SAY: "You know, I'm amazed at how little you care about your grandchildren. I would have thought they meant more to you than anything." THEY SAY: "Huh?" YOU SAY: "Well, passing this proposal won't have a big immediate effect. I mean, in the next couple of years, neither Bill Clinton nor Newt Gingrich is going to open up internment camps like Roosevelt did fifty-odd years ago. But think of your worst nightmare of a political leader. Isn't it POSSIBLE that a person like that MIGHT be in control here some time in the next 30, 40, or 50 years, with 51% of the Congress and 51% of the Senate behind him? If that does happen, do you REALLY what your grandchildren to have been stripped of their final guarantee of freedom? And do you really want them to have been stripped of it BY YOU?" - -- Charles Hamilton schuetzen@spamcop.net Houston, TX RKBA! X-NO-ARCHIVE: YES - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ PERFORM CPR ON YOUR APR! Get a NextCard Visa, in 30 seconds! Get rates as low as 0.0% Intro or 9.9% Fixed APR and no hidden fees. Apply NOW! http://click.egroups.com/1/2121/6/_/548382/_/954808515/ - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Texas-Gun-Owners is at tgo-l@onelist.com. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. [------------------------- 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, 6 Apr 00 10:43:22 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: [slick-d] Fwd: More Cities Join HUD Gun Safety Plan [Antigun Laws] (fwd) On Apr 4, Nykknakk@aol.com wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] More Cities Join HUD Gun Safety Plan .c The Associated Press By PAUL SHEPARD WASHINGTON (AP) - Gunmaker Smith & Wesson's pledge to adopt landmark safety and responsibility standards is winning it a lot of business from local government officials. In the two weeks since President Clinton praised the Springfield, Mass., gunmaker for its stance, a total of 65 cities and counties have pledged to make Smith & Wesson their preferred source for police handguns. Thirty-seven of those local jurisdictions joined the list Friday, including Oakland, Calif.; Kansas City, Mo.; Buffalo, N.Y., and Richmond Va. ``Members of this coalition will use their considerable purchasing power to encourage gun manufacturers to make a safer products that cannot be accessed by criminals and children,'' Housing and Urban Development Secretary Andrew Cuomo said at a news conference Friday. Cuomo was joined by Washington Mayor Anthony Williams who also had some good news for the nation's largest handgun maker - the city was dropping Smith & Wesson from a lawsuit against the industry. ``This has been a historical breakthrough in the effort to make our communities safer,'' Williams said, adding that other gunmakers also ``have an obligation to comply.'' In an agreement that President Clinton announced on March 17, Smith & Wesson said it would install gun locks on all the weapons it sells, introduce within three years ``smart gun'' technology permitting weapons to be fired only by their owners and bar sales of its weapons at gun shows without a background check. The company broke industry ranks and changed its policy in exchange for a promise that it would be dropped from a lawsuit being put together by the White House and HUD on behalf of local public housing authorities. The District of Columbia in January named Smith & Wesson as one of 23 gun manufactures and two gun distributors being sued to recover Medicaid other governmental health care expenditures attributed to gunshot injuries, including wounded police officers. Last week, a group of 28 cities and counties - including Los Angeles, San Francisco, Atlanta, St. Louis, Boston and Florida's Miami-Dade County - announced they would give preference in their handgun purchases to Smith & Wesson. Cuomo said any other gun manufacturer that signs the pledge like Smith & Wesson's would get similar preference. Cuomo estimated that sales to law enforcement agencies make up between 20 to 30 percent of gunmakers' business. ``It comes down to an ecomonic preference. If you have a choice of what product to buy and who to do business with, you would choose the safer product and the more responsible company,'' Cuomo said. He cited a new study by UCLA asserting that more than 1.7 million children live in homes where guns are loaded but do not have safety locks. ``That shows the need for the product Smith & Wesson is developing,'' Cuomo said. Cuomo cited a published report that gun sales at Smith & Wesson's six retail stores show sales are up more than 300 percent. Joseph Rooff, mayor of Waterloo, Iowa, said that while gun safety is often portrayed as a big city issue, his community of about 65,000 demanded at a community meeting that more be done to protect children from guns. ``People turned out and said what they want is a safer community,'' Rooff said. Bill Powers, a spokesman for the National Rifle Association, said Friday that HUD's involvement in the gun issue has taken it far afield from what it should be doing to make public housing safer. ``It's a bad deal,'' Powers said. ``I'd rather see HUD trying to clean up public housing so criminals can't run things there. Their focus ... is all wrong.'' On the Net: http://www.hud.gov/news.html AP-NY-03-31-00 1748EST Copyright 2000 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without prior written authority of The Associated Press. [------------------------- 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, 6 Apr 00 10:42:06 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Civil Liberties Defense Foundation (fwd) On Apr 06, Bill Utterback wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] From: "Director" < Subject: Civil Liberties Defense Foundation Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 09:36:04 -0500 ArialWe would like to announce the launch of the new Civil Liberties Defense Foundation website [http://]0000,0000,fefewww.libertydefense.com. >From this site, you will be able to obtain updates on the lawsuit against the mayors suing the gun manufacturers. You will be able to make (SSL secure encrypted) credit card donations to support the effort, and you will be able to learn more about your civil liberties. As most of you know, Smith & Wesson recently capitulated to the extortion of the Clinton Administration, and signed an agreement that damages the 2nd Amendment rights of all Americans. For details on the Smith & Wesson agreement, visit our Breaking News page at 0000,0000,fefehttp://www.libertydefense.com While many of the other manufacturers have stated that they will not sign the agreement, their fortitude may diminish as their legal costs continue to escalate and as political pressure mounts. To make matters worse, the attorneys general from New York, Connecticut, and Maryland have launched antitrust investigations against the distributors and dealers who have refused to do business with Smith & Wesson - 0000,0000,fefehttp://www.nytimes.com/library/national/033000snw-guns.html. We cannot predict when this Administration, the trial lawyers, and the various gun control groups and politicians will succeed in completely stripping us of our rights. That is why we must go on the offensive. That is why our attorneys are working day and night to complete the paperwork for our lawsuit to restore the 2nd Amendment rights of all Americans, and the right of gun stores to conduct business without restraints from cities in other parts of the country. We currently have fifteen Texas legislators who have agreed to go into court on your behalf, and we project that we will add ten to twenty more by the time we file the lawsuit. Visit our Breaking News page for a list. Now all we need is your support. We must raise $100,000 BEFORE WE FILE THE LAWSUIT to pay for the initial costs. The longer it takes us to raise this money, the longer we will have to wait to fight the battle. The longer we wait, the greater the chance that the other manufacturers will either go bankrupt or be forced to accept an agreement that will destroy our rights. Please do not hesitate to act the 2nd Amendment and liberty are depending on you. Visit 0000,0000,fefewww.libertydefense.com and make a donation today. Thank you, CLDF Board of Directors A few times a week, on average, I forward messages that I consider to be worthwhile. Occasionally I may be inspired to write a brief editorial. If you do not want to receive these messages, send me a message with UNSUBSCRIBE in the subject field. If you would like to begin receiving these messages, send me a message with SUBSCRIBE in the subject field. for Liberty (for all), Bill Utterback BUtterb@connecti.com - ----- "We have the greatest opportunity the world has ever seen, as long as we remain honest -- which will be as long as we can keep the attention of our people alive. If they once become inattentive to public affairs, you and I, and Congress and Assemblies, judges and governors would all become wolves." Thomas Jefferson "It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds." Samuel Adams "It is not the function of our Government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the Government from falling into error." U.S. Supreme Court in American Communications Association v. Douds, 339 U.S. 382,442 - ----- World's Smallest Political Quiz http://www.self-gov.org/quiz.html Libertarian Party http://www.lp.org/ Fully Informed Jury Association http://www.fija.org/ Gun Owners of America http://www.gunowners.org/ Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership http://www.JPFO.org/ COPYRIGHT NOTICE-- In accordance with Title 17 U. S. C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment to those who have expressed prior interest in receiving this information for nonprofit research and educational purposes only. Ref: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml [------------------------- 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, 6 Apr 00 13:18:50 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: [newsucanuse] VIN -- land use planning (fwd) On Apr 6, SlickEditor@aol.com wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] From: Vin_Suprynowicz@lvrj.com (Vin Suprynowicz) FROM MOUNTAIN MEDIA THE LIBERTARIAN, By Vin Suprynowicz High court lets an injustice stand Moscow rarely makes the list of the beautiful cities of the Old World. Why? Communism -- in polite society, "socialism" or "collectivism" -- is the doctrine that there's no such thing as private property. For most of the last century, visitors could find Russian intellectuals living in charming apartments, inside buildings that appeared virtually derelict from the outside. "Why don't you fix up the stairs, plant some flowers and give this old building a coat of paint?" the naive visitor would ask. "What, so some party member should drive by and notice it?" their horrified hosts would cry. "What if his niece is getting married and looking for a nice place to live? One phone call, and we'd be out in the street!" Under such a system, any property valuable enough to draw the attention of the armed thugs currently in uniform is immediately "placed into the collective care of the state for the good of the people." And then looted. A further refinement, developed in the 1920s, allows private individuals to retain theoretical title while granting government bureaucrats final veto power over any actual use. This system -- avoiding the more brutal appearance of outright seizure, while delivering the same result -- was dubbed in Germany "national socialism," and in Italy "fascism." Americans feel superior to such nonsense. Here, one of the realizable dreams of the middle class has long been private property ownership -- with private owners also financially motivated to keep up their properties, to increase re-sale value. But do we still have private property in America, really? Take San Francisco. Please. Housing prices now exceed the reach of the average working person, in part because the political class bars private development of much of the land. (Wouldn't want to turn over the old Presidio to some greedy private home developer. He might use it to make a profit.) Then, property taxes -- "rents" to the government for land supposedly privately held -- are jacked up, supposedly punishing only "the greedy rich." Try to pass the levies on to the tenants, and the landlord quickly faces the further refinement of "rent control." Finding all your capital thus tied up, in a locale quickly falling under the heavy hand of state socialism (pardon me, "enlightened land-use policy") what would you do? Claude and Michelline Lambert had an idea. The Lamberts own a small Victorian rooming house in San Francisco, which currently houses long-term renters. The Lamberts decided they could do better converting the building into a small tourist hotel. Of course, they had to apply for a city "permit." Always deft at counting votes, the politicians decided it would be nicer if the Lamberts were to continue renting to their current tenants. But California is not an outright communist state, so the city fathers couldn't simply seize the Lamberts' property, or outright forbid them a legal land use. Instead, the city informed the couple there would be a modest "permit fee" for converting their premises to a small hotel -- $600,000. The Lamberts offered $100,000, but no more. With the help of the The Pacific Legal Foundation, they then sued the city under the Fifth Amendment, which forbids the government from taking private property without paying just compensation. Pitifully, the U.S. Supreme Court voted 6-3 this week not to review the case (Lambert vs. City of San Francisco), allowing the extortionate $600,000 fee to stand -- with Justices Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas in dissent. Recently, the high court had issued some encouraging rulings, holding that when building or zoning codes become so onerous as to effectively prohibit an otherwise legal use, a regulatory "taking" -- whole or partial -- has occurred. In such circumstances, the court has encouragingly held, the government entity in question must compensate the land owner -- pay for what it takes. This has evoked much squawking from the central planners along America's Main Streets, who were quick to realize how very many property rights they routinely crush, and how long a line might soon form at the cash register. While this week's high court vote does not undo those good rulings, it does indicate the court may be stepping back from its earlier, forceful defense of property rights. Those who favor such restraint brand such rulings "judicial activism." But activism in reducing illegitimate state power is precisely what the court is supposed to practice. At least, so long as our elected officeholders keep taking their cues from the former occupants of the Kremlin, the Reichstag, and the Palazzo Venezia. It appears Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justice Sandra Day O'Connor led this week's cowering. Let us hope they soon regain their courage -- or that an enlightened new president soon finds the opportunity to place the court under the guidance of a firmer defender of the Bill of Rights -- someone more like Clarence Thomas. Vin Suprynowicz is assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas Review-Journal. His book, "Send in the Waco Killers: Essays on the Freedom Movement, 1993-1998," is available by dialing 1-800-244-2224; or via web site http://www.thespiritof76.com/wacokillers.html. *** Vin Suprynowicz, vin@lvrj.com "The evils of tyranny are rarely seen but by him who resists it." -- John Hay, 1872 "The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed -- and thus clamorous to be led to safety -- by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." -- H.L. Mencken * * * To subscribe, send a message to vinsends-request@ezlink.com, from your NEW address, including the word "subscribe" (with no quotation marks) in the "Subject" line. All I ask of electronic subscribers is that they not RE-forward my columns until on or after the embargo date which appears at the top of each, and that (should they then choose to do so) they copy the columns in their entirety, preserving the original attribution. The Vinsends list is maintained by Alan Wendt in Colorado, who may be reached directly at alan@ezlink.com. The web sites for the Suprynowicz column are at http://www.infomagic.com/liberty/vinyard.htm, and http://www.nguworld.com/vindex. The Vinyard is maintained by Michael Voth in Flagstaff, who may be reached directly at mvoth@infomagic.com. [------------------------- 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, 10 Apr 00 10:46:04 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: In Praise of Outlaws (fwd) On Apr 09, Odell Harwell wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] Subject: In Praise of Outlaws From: dave w thomas Source: The Libertarian Enterprise http://www.webleyweb.com/tle/ I choose to be an outlaw. There was once a time when a majority of American Citizens understood this and approved. True, there were probably numerically more Tories residing in America at the time, but by definition one who chooses to be the subject of a ruler is not a Citizen, and of no consequence to anyone honorable. America was a nobility-free republic -- a revolutionary creation of outlaws. A land of honorable outlaws who agreed upon a minimal set of laws that even an outlaw could abide and grudgingly lent a tiny fraction of their natural sovereignty and reclaimed liberty to the obvious mutual benefit of all. Not all criminals are outlaws, and not all outlaws are criminals. An outlaw lives by a moral code, but blithely ignores absurd laws designed to suppress dissent and control private personal behavior. A criminal lives by no code, external or internal and is an animal to be mistrusted or destroyed. A criminal ignores whatever is inconvenient at the moment while an outlaw often chooses a personally inconvenient and sometimes dangerous course in the name of principle and honor. A criminal has absolute freedom, while an outlaw has personal liberty and spiritual freedom. A criminal will steal food from a working man, while an outlaw will refuse to pay child support to a welfare agency. A criminal will lobby into existence a law putting the cash of ten million laborers into his pocket, while an outlaw will refuse to file a tax return. A criminal will carry a gun to intimidate victims, while an outlaw will carry his gun as a symbol of his liberty and to defend against all aggressors. Our Bill of Rights is a relic of our outlaw past. It is a set of codes written by free Citizens who understood the necessity of controlling the monster they knew they were creating. They knew that there can be no words so offensive that they dare not be spoken or published. They knew that if anyone had that power to suppress, all had it and no one would dare speak freely, just as it had been in the ugly old world order they had fled. They understood the necessity of faith as well as the irreconcilability of conflicting dogma. They had seen firsthand the use of official religions to control outlaws, and didn't much care for what they saw. So they penned the First Amendment to the Constitution. They understood that the right to be armed, and to be a threat to the ruler simply by being, was an absolute. They codified this very clearly in a sentence ending "shall NOT be infringed" which contains not a single allow or permit. They understood that any compromise on this principle of freedom deeded the power of life and death over them to some unaccountable other. The right to be armed guarantees not bravery, nor victory, nor nobility, nor honesty nor honor, nor even safety, but merely the right to honest respect and a fair fight. And so the Second Amendment came to be written down. They had seen the tyranny and felt the violation of having the government put soldiers and officers into their homes to keep dissent minimized and politically correct. An outlaw knows this is no longer necessary, of course, since electronic monitoring can work more effectively and less personably in all cases. But they didn't have electronic magic at the time, so the founding outlaws only prohibited the quartering of troops in private homes in peacetime. This was the genesis of the Third Amendment. Many of the founding outlaws had felt the humiliation of being routinely searched in hopes of finding something illegal to be used against them or to turn them against their fellow outlaws. They knew of such outrageous offenses as random roadblocks, home invasion searches, searches through bank accounts and payrolls, and the ultimate humiliation of personal body searches. They knew how much could and would be made illegal and used to wrongly label them criminal, when the Tories eventually insinuated themselves into the newly created governments. They knew that actual criminals would use a Citizen's cloak of privacy to conceal misdeeds, and that this privacy must be protected from casual intrusions and mandatory disclosures. For all of this, the Fourth Amendment was drafted. The founding outlaws also knew well the coercive and dishonest tactics and abusive methods of executives and prosecutors, and so the Fifth Amendment was written to provide a tool to use against the excesses of the law. Remember, these were our founding outlaws! In the same vein, they knew the Tories would try to render these weapons ineffective in different kinds of legal maneuverings, so they enshrined some more protections, especially the right to trial by jury in the Sixth Amendment. And to avoid end runs around these protections by incorrectly labeling a dispute between law and outlaw as a contractual dispute, they enshrined the same jury trial provision in the Seventh Amendment. The founding outlaws finished up their magnum opus by providing a way for an outlaw to get out of jail in the eighth amendment, and specifically prohibiting the creation of most of the laws of which Tories are so fond in the Ninth and Tenth Amendments. So what is the point of this little history lesson? I'm one of the proud breed of modern outlaws. For a while, I thought we might be an endangered species. Now, however, thanks to the excesses and impatience of the Clinton Regime, our population has made a tremendous comeback, with our numbers increasing tenfold in a single generation. Do you remember the first point about how not all criminals are outlaws and how not all outlaws are criminals? The Tories in their twentieth century guises have been allowed to prey increasingly on the individual outlaw in the name of fighting crime. Every one of the protections in the Bill of Rights and the original Federal Constitution have been violated repeatedly in spirit and in letter. The Bill of Rights is simply the agreed upon part of the outlaw's code. And the government has itself become not an outlaw, but a criminal, by repeatedly proving that it follows no code at all. And so, since the outlaw lives by a code, there are government laws he must break and not be silent about, while a criminal lives by no code and can always beat the law. The result is lots of criminals, lots of Tories, and a few angry outlaws. This same situation prevailed at the beginning of this country -- Criminal rulers, Tories obeying, and outlaws standing with manly firmness at Lexington and Concord and Bunker Hill. And since the code or covenant has been broken, the response is and will be to avenge the wrongs, since avenging the wrongs is one of the most sacred items in the outlaw's code. Remember Waco! [------------------------- 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 #325 *************************