From: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com (roc-digest) To: roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: roc-digest V2 #443 Reply-To: roc-digest Sender: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk roc-digest Friday, May 25 2001 Volume 02 : Number 443 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 09:12:55 -0700 From: Bill Vance Subject: Re: Property Rights Victory/Endangered Species Act Must be Analyzed (fwd) Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 20:31:41 +0000 From: "Charles C. Carter" Subject: Re: Property Rights Victory/Endangered Species Act Must be Analyzed > Court Rules Economic Impact Must Be Tied to ESA > By Pat Taylor > CNSNews.com Correspondent > May 18, 2001 > > (CNSNew.com) - A U.S. appellate court has determined that when the > Fish and Wildlife Service designates critical habitat for an > endangered species, it must analyze and consider the full economic > impact on the area in which the habitat is located. That includes > any economic harm resulting from the initial listing of the species > under the Endangered Species Act. > > The decision was hailed as a significant victory for people > throughout the country who say their livelihoods and culture are > being ruined and their communities destroyed through deliberate > misuse of the ESA by environmental extremists. > > The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver, Colorado, made the > unanimous decision May 11 in a case involving the Southwestern > Willow Flycatcher, a small bird that nests in areas along rivers and > streams in seven Southwestern states. > > Hidden Agenda? > > The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service determined in 1995 that the > flycatcher was endangered, but it deferred a "critical habitat" > designation so it would have more time to gather information. But > environmentalists accused the FWS of dragging its feet. > > In March 1997, the Tucson-based Southwest Center for Biological > Diversity won a lawsuit in a U.S. District Court in Arizona that > ordered the FWS to complete the flycatcher critical habitat > designation in 120 days. > > The designation of critical habitat along hundreds of miles of > rivers and streams would mean that no cattle or other livestock > could graze near those waterways, which are the very lifeblood of > ranching in the arid Southwest. > > Ranchers and farmers, who believe the real agenda of professional > activist groups like the Southwest Center is to destroy their > livelihood and way of life, were devastated. The potential negative > economic impact on agricultural counties, especially in Arizona and > New Mexico, was enormous. > > A coalition of agriculture groups, led by the New Mexico Cattle > Growers' Association, filed their own lawsuit in March of 1998, > arguing that the flycatcher habitat designation should be > invalidated because the FWS did not correctly consider the economic > impact of its decision. > > Catch-22 Logic > > Up to this point, the FWS has been operating under a Catch-22 > system. > > The ESA says the decision to add a species to the endangered list > must be based "solely on the basis of the best scientific and > commercial data available." No consideration of the economic impact > is required, or even allowed. > > But the ESA does require the FWS to perform an economic analysis > before it designates critical habitat for an endangered species. > > In practice, the FWS usually lists the species first, without > designating critical habitat. No economic analysis is done. Then, > when critical habitat is designated later, the FWS assumes that if > there is any economic impact, it already occurred when the species > was listed; therefore, it is ignored. > > Using this logic, the FWS determined that its flycatcher habitat > designation resulted in no economic impact, since it would "result > in no additional protection for the flycatcher nor have any > additional economic effects beyond those that may have been caused > by listing and by other statutes." > > Court Throws Out Catch-22 > > The Cattle Growers argued that this made no sense and they said it > violated the intent of the ESA. They argued the Fish and Wildlife > Service, when designating critical habitat, must perform a full > economic impact assessment, including the economic impact that might > have been caused by adding the species to the endangered list in the > first place. > > The 10th Circuit Court agreed. The court set aside the current > critical habitat designation for the flycatcher and instructed the > FWS to start over again with a new habitat designation, including a > full economic impact assessment. > > The court further opined, "The record in this case suggests that the > impact will be immediate and the consequences could be disastrous." > > Critical Habitat Questioned > > In making its decision, the court stated, "The root of the problem > lies in the FWS's long held policy position that critical habitat > designations are unhelpful, duplicative, and unnecessary." The court > noted that once a species has been added to the endangered list, the > FWS typically puts off designating critical habitat for it "until > forced to do so by court order." > > Such court orders have resulted from the profusion of lawsuits being > filed by groups like the Southwest Center. This is the kind of > lawsuit for which President Bush has asked Congress to suspend > funding for one year. > > Most critics of the ESA - and these lawsuits - point to the fact > that critical habitat designation has not helped recover even one > endangered species. They believe that other, less economically > destructive methods of species recovery are far more effective. > > The flycatcher case is one of nearly a dozen similar suits in which > New Mexico agriculture has been fighting for its life. A similar > determination was made in a different case by a federal district > court in Albuquerque several months ago, but this is the first time > the issue has been determined at the appellate level. > > "We hope we are creating a climate, through the courts, that will > allow the custom and culture in New Mexico and the West to survive > and hopefully even thrive again," said Jimmy R. Bason, president of > the New Mexico Cattle Growers' Association. > > "Livestock grazing has been a part of New Mexico for nearly 400 > years. Ranching operations have provided not only habitat for > wildlife but also water and supplemental feed throughout that time. > We believe that it is because we are here caring for the land that > species have survived." > > > > All original CNSNews.com material, copyright 1998-2001 Cybercast News > Service. - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!! - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 09:14:08 -0700 From: Bill Vance Subject: VIN -- the Pork Wars (fwd) From: Rich Martin Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 01:32:27 -0700 (PDT) Subject: {NewsUCanUse} VIN -- the Pork Wars FROM MOUNTAIN MEDIA THE LIBERTARIAN, By Vin Suprynowicz Let the Pork Wars begin Leave it to U.S. Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va. ... Washington's reigning king of pork. The senior senator was some upset when a number of his Democratic colleagues expressed support for President Bush's tax cut last week. Sen. Byrd responded by warning them -- first in private, then in public -- that if they voted to let their constituents keep a little more of what they earn, Sen. Byrd would see to it that their own pork spending was blocked, potentially leading to Republican gains in the 2002 off-year elections. "At a closed-door meeting of Senate Democrats last Tuesday," reported Roll Call, the Capitol Hill newspaper, on May 14, "Sen. Robert Byrd (W.Va.) threatened to slash the spending projects of lawmakers who broke ranks to support President Bush's $1.35 trillion tax-cut plan. "After delivering the threat on Tuesday, Byrd backed it up with a pointed floor speech just before the Senate passed the budget resolution. " 'Let me say to my colleagues, if you vote for this budget conference report, don't come to the watering hole,' Byrd warned in the floor speech. ... "But five Democratic Senators ignored the advice of the top Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, setting up an explosive showdown as the chamber gets down to brass tacks on the 13 spending bills," Roll Call continued. Two Democrats in particular, Sens. Max Baucus, D-Mont., and Max Cleland, D-Ga., are seen as facing serious repercussions should Byrd follow through on his threat, with the result that they "fail to bring home the bacon" to their respective states. Both Senators are up for re-election in 2002 and the GOP is expected to target them by providing money and resources to their respective Republican opponents. (The three other Democrats who could face Byrd's wrath are Sens. John Breaux, D-La., Ben Nelson, D-Neb., and Zell Miller, D-Ga.) Sen. Byrd at least does all parties the favor of stripping away any remaining veils of modesty from the true Democratic agenda, which seems to size up as follows: Tax cuts are to be opposed because they could somewhat limit the ability of senior senators to waste hundreds of millions on "pork" projects never envisioned or authorized by those who penned the Constitution. Such pork projects, in turn, are vital not so much because the barefoot citizens of Gandeeville, W.Va., really need an eight-lane federal highway "demonstration project" to better link them to the vital parsnip and possum patches of Elmira and Gassaway. No, the purpose of these allocations is forthrightly to guarantee the re-election of senators who need to brag on the campaign stump that they've "brought home the bacon" to their local jurisdiction ... regardless of how useless and inefficient the spending, regardless of the resultant general reduction in financial independence and well-being of taxpayers nationwide. After all, the more we're overburdened and (in relative terms) impoverished, the less able American families will be to pay for their own food, clothing, and education -- heck, even to stay home and rear their own kids -- and the more "need" will thus be expressed for further handouts from Uncle Sam ... in turn generating demand for additional federal "programs." Ah, what fearful symmetry. Government reduced to a set of intricate and expensive "solutions" to problems of its own making. (What, my use of "impoverished" is inappropriate? Many of our American fathers and grandfathers supported their families in free-standing homes on a single salary, and paid cash for a new car every four years. Can you?) For the record, President Bush's tiny tax cuts would not have the effect of reducing federal spending -- in fact, federal largesse will continue to grow at a record pace, even if American wage-earners are allowed to hang onto the tiny additional stipend now proposed. The correct answer to Sen. Byrd is that we hope he indeed follows through on starting to trim his colleagues' "pork." Let's watch the percentage by which he determines their spending requests can be trimmed, while still meeting the quite limited, legitimate spending obligations of the Congress under Article I, Section 8. Then, those same rates of reduction should be applied to him and all his colleagues ... after the GOP gains the five additional seats which Sen. Byrd now appears so willing to render vulnerable in 2002. A $1.35 trillion tax-cut? They ain't seen nothin' yet. Vin Suprynowicz is assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas Review-Journal. Subscribe to his monthly newsletter by sending $72 to Privacy Alert, 1475 Terminal Way, Suite E for Easy, Reno, NV 89502. His book, "Send in the Waco Killers: Essays on the Freedom Movement, 1993-1998," is available at 1-800-244-2224, or via web site www.thespiritof76.com/wacokillers.html. *** Vin Suprynowicz, vin@lvrj.com "When great changes occur in history, when great principles are involved, as a rule the majority are wrong. The minority are right." -- Eugene V. Debs (1855-1926) "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. - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!! - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 10:14:50 -0700 From: Bill Vance Subject: THE LIBERTARIAN, By Vin Suprynowicz (fwd) From: Rich Martin Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 22:27:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [richslick] THE LIBERTARIAN, By Vin Suprynowicz Subject: May 20 column, short version -- medical marijuana FROM MOUNTAIN MEDIA THE LIBERTARIAN, By Vin Suprynowicz Another nadir in homicidal hair-splitting The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday there is no "medical necessity exception" to the federal Controlled Substances Act. The California-based American Medical Marijuana Association was quick to reassure concerned parties that the ruling was of sharply limited scope: "It is important to recognize that the Supreme Court decision did not strike down or in anyway modify any state medical marijuana laws," the AMMA wrote in a press release. "The Supreme Court did not say that citizens don't have the right to cultivate and possess medical marijuana within their own state borders. All this decision said is that medical necessity is not a defense to federal law. "Bottom line," the AMMA continued, "medical marijuana still stands in those states that have approved it. Even the medical marijuana clubs will be largely unaffected, because they will simply switch from distributing medical pot to helping patients grow their own. ..." Maybe. But it turns out I wasn't the only person whose first response was to recall the high court's previous nadir of homicidal hair-splitting, when Justice Taney held in the infamous 1857 Dred Scott decision that black men are property, not persons entitled to the protection of the law. The court's defenders will whine that the justices aren't supposed to "legislate from the bench"; that they were only asked whether there is a "medical necessity defense" under the federal Controlled Substances Act, whereupon they looked it up, determined there was none, and so ruled. The question of the Drug War's constitutionality wasn't answered because it was never asked. The court simply tells us what Congress intended. Which is a black-hearted lie, of course. If Congress in a fit of madness were to enact the Nazi race laws tomorrow, would the justices sit there with straight faces, instructing us, "We cannot locate within the Act any 'religious freedom' exemption to the requirements that Jews sew yellow stars on their clothing," etc.? Of course not. When it's the First Amendment right of religious freedom that's involved, everyone understands the court's first duty is to determine whether the law in question is constitutional on its face. If it isn't, under the great precedent of Marbury vs.. Madison, the law is held to be null and void. Besides which, attorneys for the Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative et al. did assert (as Justice Thomas acknowledges) that he federal drug statute "exceeds Congress' Commerce Clause powers, violates the substantive due process rights of patients, and offends the fundamental liberties of the people under the Fifth, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments." Fact is, the entire federal drug war is blatantly unconstitutional, and any high court obeying its oath to preserve our government of limited power would have thrown it out in its entirety the first time it got a look at it. There are no fewer than three independently sufficient grounds on which this could and should be held. The weakest of these is the 10th Amendment, which tells us that any power not specifically delegated to the United States by the Constitution is reserved to the states or to the people. Since nowhere in the Constitution is Congress delegated any specific power to regulate what responsible adults choose to put in their own bodies, any state law (like California's successful 1996 medical marijuana proposition) supersedes federal authority. This is the weakest argument simply because it would seem to authorize state drug wars. Now, truth be told, even state drug wars are further banned under the 14th Amendment (the second sufficient grounds for tossing out the Drug War). This amendment bans the several states from "abridging the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States." Under the 14th, the high court could and should have thrown out California's current marijuana distribution scheme not because it allows some marijuana use, but because it places any restrictions on marijuana use, at all. Am I saying Americans have some kind of right to drugs? Damned right, and here's where we come to the constitutional provision which even a second-year law student could hardly ignore. The Ninth Amendment advises the justices that, "The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." In 1787 and thenceforward, at least through 1915, did our ancestors on these shores "retain the right" to grow, produce, import, buy and sell opium, cocaine, alcohol and marijuana whenever they pleased, without federal restriction save the occasional modest excise? Indeed they did. And the proof is that when Congress wanted to ban one of these forms of commerce, a separate constitutional amendment -- the 18th, since repealed -- had to be enacted to allow a federal ban on "intoxicating liquors." So: when was the parallel and necessary constitutional amendment ratified, authorizing the War on Drugs? Pardon me, I didn't hear that. Could you speak up? Vin Suprynowicz is assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas Review-Journal. Subscribe to his monthly newsletter by sending $72 to Privacy Alert, 1475 Terminal Way, Suite E for Easy, Reno, NV 89502. His book, "Send in the Waco Killers: Essays on the Freedom Movement, 1993-1998," is available at 1-800-244-2224. *** Vin Suprynowicz, vin@lvrj.com "When great changes occur in history, when great principles are involved, as a rule the majority are wrong. The minority are right." -- Eugene V. Debs (1855-1926) "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. - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!! - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 10:16:08 -0700 From: Bill Vance Subject: OT-Good News! CONGRESSIONAL SUBCOMMITTEE APPROVES ANTI-SPAM BILL (fwd) From: Carl William Spitzer Subject: {SD-2} CONGRESSIONAL SUBCOMMITTEE APPROVES ANTI-SPAM BILL Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 09:38:56 PDT A House telecommunications subcommittee has given its appro- val to the Unsolicited Commercial Electronic Mail Act of 2001, legislation sponsored by Reps. Heather Wilson (R-N.M.) and Gene Green (D-TX) that would give consumers greater control over the amount of spam flooding their inboxes. The bill gives consumers the right to force spammers to take their names off spamming lists or face a penalty that could reach $50,000. In addition, spammers must make consumers aware of this right and must always use real e-mail address- es. The House Energy and Commerce Committee will take up the bill next; committee chairman Billy Tauzin says that the bill eventually may be revised but will function as an "excellent base" and "good policy." American Insurance Association lobbyist John Savercool criticizes the bill as a potential roadblock to the growth of e-commerce. (Reuters, 21 March 2001) - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!! - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 15:50:15 -0700 From: Bill Vance Subject: America Is Hazardous to Children (fwd) From: BOBWORN@aol.com Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 03:15:42 EDT Subject: America Is Hazardous to Children BOB'S FORWARDER'S NOTE: 225 years ago we had a King who terrorized us and we SHOT his terrorists. Until the sheeple once again grow a backbone and send a message that these terrorists understand - a message that comes at them at around 2800 feet-per-second - NOTHING will get better and will continue to worsen for the sheeple who put themselves into voluntary slavery. May God have mercy on what will remain of my once-great nation, this I pray. Not-so-respecfully Submitted, Bob Worn, Major-USAF (Retired) Route 8 Box 422 Gilmer, Texas 75644-8825 903-734-6970 Subj: America Is Hazardous to Children Date: 5/21/01 8:59:49 AM Central Daylight Time From: michaelj@america.net (M.A. Johnson) America Is Hazardous to Children by Brad Edmonds Two misadventures involving home schoolers have made news all over the internet in the last week. In one case reported by Michelle Malkin on May 18, a county in Maryland has charged a mother with criminal truancy because she refused to allow officials to review her curriculum while she also had not registered her schooling efforts with an approved sponsor. She was using a strong curriculum, by the way. Another case goes like this: A naked two-year-old gets out the front door of the house, and a neighbor calls the authorities. Social workers demand to question family members, the family members refuse, and the family is now in the third year of dealing with it in court. This case isn't about home schooling directly, but relates to parents' rights to decide for their own children. It also happens that the parents are home schoolers maybe coincidence, maybe the reason for the government pursuit. What should be news, however, is that attacks are happening across the nation, and they're nothing new. Here's a smattering from the Home Schooling Legal Defense Association: The East Otero School District in Colorado requires parents to report home-schooled children's standardized test scores. What the district did to at least one family was try to intimidate them into letting the government determine the time and place of testing, which is not the law. In California, the Montabello Unified School District sent a representative to the home of home-schooling parents to try to make them "register" their children with the public schools, which is not the law. Also in California, two families that recently began home schooling went through all the legal rigmarole, and still were treated to "mistaken" accusatory visits from social workers, one accompanied by a policeman. All these cases were reported during the first 17 days of May highly significant because they involved members of the Home Schooling Legal Defense Association. How much more such bullying is happening to home schoolers who aren't members of this one organization? The same website details legislative attacks on home schooling. A current proposal in Maine would remove forced-immunization exemptions for those who have religious or other objections, and thus would indirectly (but disproportionately) affect home schoolers. Florida is considering a bill that would allow the government to "assess" the "needs" and "strengths" of families until every child reaches age 9. More openly aimed at home schooling is a bill in Michigan that would impose new mandatory standardized testing for home schoolers, even though the data show that home-schooled children do better than government-school victims on college entrance exams. Minnesota is currently considering adding new testing and parent-qualifications requirements. So, while we have state legislators making it increasingly difficult to home school your children without being prosecuted, we have school districts knocking on doors and lying to parents about the law to intimidate them into giving up the whole idea. I suspect that many of the knocking-on-the-door-and-lying incidents are done knowingly: In the cases mentioned above, the Home Schooling Legal Defense Association faxed a letter to the offending district, and the parents were not bothered again (not bothered so far; these are recent cases). All this after it has become common knowledge that home schooling is the best thing for children, which proves that the best thing for the children is the last thing on the mind of your government. Some states are becoming friendly to home schoolers. Learn about those, and consider relocating to them even if you don't have children. However, the other states noted above (and more) are desperate to stamp out home schooling, whether by lying about the law or by pressuring lawmakers into changing the law. In these states, the absolute-power ambitions of elected politicians combine with the damn-the-children, protect-our-jobs union mentality of the government schools to produce damaging laws and Orwellian offenses by the "most respected" public servants (respected by the uninformed, anyway) state senators and educators. All of this is happening now and has been for years, and without much coverage by rightist commentators. As I said, the real news is that it's yesterday's news. America is indeed hazardous for children and for loving, informed, involved parents. The time to sit and be outraged is over it's time to write to the newspaper, organize rallies, and flood your lawmakers with protests. The really bad news: America is about the best country in the world for children. - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!! - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 15:51:20 -0700 From: Bill Vance Subject: GUN-SHOW BILL IS NOT WHAT THEY SAY (fwd) From: stevechr@ptd.net Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 15:23:03 -0400 Subject: GUN-SHOW BILL IS NOT WHAT THEY SAY Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 11:34:28 -0700 From: Alan Korwin GUN-SHOW BILL IS NOT WHAT THEY SAY Re: S. 890, The McCain-Lieberman Bill: "Gun Show Loophole Closing and Gun Law Enforcement Act of 2001." by Alan Korwin, Author Gun Laws of America Mass media publicity on the newly proposed gun-show bill is grossly inaccurate. The bill has almost nothing to do with what you've probably heard so far. The so-called "gun-show loophole" headlines are a minor detail and basically obscure what the bill really does. I've just finished studying the eight pages of legalese. Here is it what it calls for: 1. Unprecedented federal control over gun shows nationwide -- perfectly legal gun shows become strictly outlawed without prior federal approval, licensing and registration of each show; 2. Centralized federal licensing and registration of every gun-show promoter in the nation; 3. Centralized federal registration of every vendor -- including non-gun vendors -- at any gun show in the country. In order for me to sell my BOOKS at a gun show I'll have to pre-register and prove who I am, or face arrest; a private individual looking to sell a single gun would be treated as a vendor under this law and must be registered even if the gun isn't sold; 4. Centralized federal registration of EVERY PERSON who attends a gun show in America, whether or not they make purchases of anything at all - -- you won't be allowed in without registering; 5. Centralized collection of "any other information" on gun-show attendees, as determined solely by the Secretary of the Treasury; 6. Imprisonment for attending a gun show and failing to give up any information required by regulations of the Secretary of the Treasury; 7. Imprisonment of any gun-show promoter who fails to register a single vendor; 8. Imprisonment of gun-show promoters who cannot prove they notified every person attending a gun show of the new rules, and obtained from attendees any information the Secretary of the Treasury mandates by regulation; 9. Centralized collection of "any other information" the Secretary of the Treasury decides, by regulation, is necessary on vendors, attendees, and the gun show itself; 10. Submission by gun-show promoters of vendor registration logs a) 30 days before any gun show, and b) additional submission of updated vendor registration logs 72 hours before any gun show, and c) additional submission of vendor registration logs within five days of the close of any gun show, under penalty of arrest and imprisonment for non-compliance; 11. Identification of vendors only by use of federally approved photo ID that may include use of a social security number, electronically encoded data, or "biometric identifiers" such as fingerprint, voice print, retina scan, iris scan, or similar (as defined under 18 USC 1028(d)(2)); 12. Creation of a new license (in addition to a gun-show-promoter license), similar to FFLs, for individuals who want access to the NICS national background check system for facilitating gun-show sales for private citizens; 13. Regulations to be issued by the Secretary of the Treasury on the procedures, data collections, methods and implementation of the entire process to federally control gun shows, in addition to the requirements made by the proposed statute; such regulations will not be known, drafted or even suggested, until after the McCain-Lieberman law is enacted; 14. The proposed bill also puts pressure on state governments to make at least 95% of their law enforcement records for the past 30 years openly available to the federal government; and - -- makes unlimited funds available for the states to comply with these federal goals; - -- requires annual federal review of states' compliance; - -- increases penalties (up to ten years imprisonment) for record-keeping violations; - -- grants states permission to make even more restrictive requirements without being out of compliance with these new federal laws (and by implication, puts states that resist these rules in federal trouble); - -- provides hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars for more law enforcement under numerous programs including project Exile and others; - -- hires 200 more Federal BATF Agents; - -- provides $10 million to the National Institute for Justice to give out for research on "technologies that limit the use of a gun to the owner"; and - -- provides for annual reports (in great detail) by the Attorney General to Congress on whether the Brady law is working; 15. Enlargement of the federal bureaucracy and appropriation from taxpayers of "such funds as are necessary" to license, register and monitor an estimated ten million non-criminals who attend the thousands of gun shows held annually in America; and 16. Oh yes, I almost forgot about the so-called "loophole" part the media is so excited about -- the McCain-Lieberman bill will make an honest private citizen a criminal for transferring a gun to another honest private citizen, without first registering the transfer with, and getting permission from, the federal government (represented by the FBI at its data complex in Clarksburg, West Virginia). Transfer or possession of a firearm to or by a criminal (a "federally prohibited possessor") is completely unaffected by the McCain-Lieberman "loophole" bill, so I guess it's accurate to characterize it as a loophole bill. To sum up: Perfectly legal gun sales -- with no victims or criminal activity of any kind -- are outlawed at gun shows by the McCain-Lieberman bill, unless the sale is pre-registered with the federal government; real crimes are totally unaffected; and your friends in the federal government take over full control of gun shows -- which have been previously free of government infringement for more than 200 years. Please write your local news outlet and politely request a correction. Permission to circulate or use any or all of this report is granted, provided my credit and contact information is included. Alan Korwin, Author Gun Laws of America Bloomfield Press 12629 N. Tatum #440 Phoenix, AZ 85032 602-996-4020 alan@gunlaws.com http://www.gunlaws.com "We publish the gun laws." - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!! - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 14:55:17 -0700 From: Bill Vance Subject: Memorial Day (fwd) From: "Bob Mueller" Subject: Fw: [ccw-talk] OFF TOPIC - Memorial Day Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 12:57:51 -0400 Thought I'd pass this on in light of recent posts here. I am not the auth= or, but man, I wish I was... - -- Bob Mueller Public Relations Ohioans For Concealed Carry www.OhioCCW.org The second to last thing a morally responsible, prudent person wants to d= o is kill another human being regardless of how reprehensible, villainous o= r dangerous that person might be. The last thing this morally responsible, prudent person wants to do is be killed by that reprehensible, villainous and dangerous person. -- Chuck Klein - ----- Original Message ----- From: David Miller To: Sent: Friday, May 25, 2001 11:24 AM Subject: Re: [ccw-talk] OFF TOPIC - Memorial Day > I was honored to have this published in the OGCA Banquet Program. The banquet > was to honor WWII Veterans. > > > > Earn This... > > A wave of patriotism swept through this land of ours nearly 60 years ag= o. > Nobody under the age of 50, myself included, really knows what it was l= ike to > live in America at that time. Americans were united in purpose in a way that > this country hasn't seen since. Children collected tin cans, rubber and paper. > Women planted Victory Gardens, saved fat, and hung service flags in the= ir > windows. Men were called to become soldiers. > > They were called from their lives as farmers, accountants, carpenters, > doctors, and all professions. The rich and the poor alike were called a= way > from their homes, their jobs, their families and their friends to take = an oath > to defend the Constitution. To leave behind everything, and swear to Go= d to > defend something that many of them had never read before. This meant training > to become soldiers, and being a soldier means that you are trained to kill. > Good men, reluctant men, were told that they would be shipped to Europe= , or > North Africa, or to the middle of the Pacific Ocean; to fight and to ki= ll the > enemy of the Constitution, the enemy of Freedom. To fight against tyran= ny. > > It is said that, "All of them gave some, and some of them gave all." Th= ere are > 9,386 of the men who gave all, buried in a cemetery at St. Laurent-sur-Mer. > This cemetery is located on a bluff, overlooking a beach in Normandy, France; > which, in June of 1944 was known, simply, as Omaha. > > It is in this cemetery that a recent film makes its start. Saving Priva= te Ryan > is a story about a squad of Rangers who are ordered to penetrate enemy lines > to locate and retrieve a soldier named Ryan. This soldier had three brothers > who, unbeknownst to him, were all killed in action and it was determine= d that > the last Ryan should be returned home, lest his mother lose all her son= s in > the war. > > So eight rangers risk their lives for one man. One man that their commanders > decided was more important than any one of them. Needless to say, not a= ll of > them are thrilled with the prospect of piercing the enemy's line to bri= ng back > just one man. These men had sworn an oath though, and so they went. Reluctant > warriors. > > As it is in war, it is also in war movies, not everyone in the squad survives > to the end. When one of the rangers is hit with enemy fire, he motions Ryan > over to him. He says two very important words to him. Two words, before= he > dies. > > "Earn This." > > In that moment, that soldier became every Veteran speaking to every American. > "Earn what we all fought for and what many of us died for. Think of us often. > Remember our names. Do not forget us." And that is the request of all t= he > young men who have died in all the wars =AD from Normandy to the Cho-si= n > Reservoir. From Da Nang to the Gulf. From Somalia to Kosovo. > > "Earn this." > > I have since realized that my own free and bountiful life has been baptized in > the blood of the soldiers of World War II, and of all other wars. I hav= e > realized that the 9,386 men buried at St. Laurent, though a fraction of the > total that died, did for me in a very real way, what those Rangers did = for > Ryan. I have realized that the men who fought, and lived, and came home and > are living out their lives right now did the same... For me. Perhaps I = owe all > of them an accounting of how well I've lived, of whether I've earned wh= at > they've bequeathed to me and the world. > > I struggle today, wondering if I can ever make the equation balance. De= ep down > I know that there is nothing that I can ever do to earn what they did f= or me. > There is no accounting, to balance the equation of even one man dying... for > me, let alone... thousands. > > But it is worthwhile to try. > > How do we even begin to give an accounting? We begin by remembering. > Remembering the fallen soldier who never returned. Remembering those th= at did > return, scarred and scared, and different somehow. > > Then we must be thankful. We must express our thanks to those men and women > who fought against tyranny so that we may be free. Don't assume that th= ey know > the world is thankful. Do your part, tell a Veteran today that you are > thankful for the sacrifices that they made, on the altar of freedom. > > Finally, we must let our light shine. You know the children's song, "Th= is > little light of mine." Well that is also what we need to do to begin to "earn > this." Don't hold back any action that is good. No matter how small and > insignificant it may seem, do it. Edmund Burke once said that, "All tha= t is > required for evil to triumph, is for good men to do nothing." The gift that we > have all received from our Veterans is Freedom, and the cost of Freedom= is > eternal vigilance. We must guard and protect this rare and costly gift.= We > must be vigilant, we must not allow evil to triumph easily. A small bit= of > good now may prevent a great evil later. > > On Veteran's Day, on Memorial Day, and everyday, this is what we all ne= ed to > do, to "earn this." Remember; Give Thanks; and Let Our Light Shine. Remember > all the men and women who gave their lives for us. Give thanks to all t= he men > and women still with us, who gave of themselves when it was required. A= nd > finally, don't let the torch go out. Keep the light of the torch that t= hey > passed to us burning brightly by adding just a little of our own light = to it. > > > These are the things that we all need to do as Americans; so that we ma= y > continue to enjoy Freedom, Liberty and Justice for All. > > =A92001 by David J. Miller > All Rights Reserved. > david-j-miller@usa.net > Permission to freely distribute is granted by the author. > > > ____________________________________________________________________ > Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=3D= 1 > . . > . OhioCCW.org is a non-profit organization of lawful firearms owners = . > . "The people have the right to bear arms for . > . their defense and security" -Ohio Constitution, Art I, Sec 4. . > . = . > . Mailing list directions found here: http://ohioCCW.org/maillist.php= . > . Print & Sign the petition today: http://ohioCCW.org/petition.php = . > . Join! We need your support: http://ohioCCW.org/join_ofcc.php = . > . (Online signup & dues renewal coming soon!) = . > . = . > . Email your Senator, Rep & Governor Taft in ONE EASY step. We will = . > . even fax a copy to them (in development): http://ohioCCW.org/alet.php= . - --=20 - -------------------------------------------------------------------------= - --- RKBA! ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** RK= BA! - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+------------------= - --- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath n= o weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand =3D Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy= a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Chr= ist - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+------------------= - --- Constitutional Government is dead, LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION!!!!! - -------------------------------------------------------------------------= - --- - - ------------------------------ End of roc-digest V2 #443 *************************