From: chardy@ES.COM (Charles Hardy) Subject: New mailing list and olympic hypocrisy Date: 04 Jan 1999 10:47:29 -0700 ----BEGIN FORWARDED MESSGE---- PLEASE DISTRIBUTE AND REPOST WIDELY!!!! Hi all! At long last, the Nolympics mail list is up and ready for business. (Thanks to the folks at aros.net for their invaluable assistance in getting the list functioning properly!) The goal of the Nolympics list is to facilitate the efforts of all people working to end gun control at the Olympics. The list is a two-way list which means that you are encouraged to post your own thoughts, ideas, suggestions, questions, and to help ot hers who have questions or problems. If we're going to succeed, it needs to be a group effort! Please keep posts as brief as possible, stay "on topic", and refrain from posting unnecessary messages. Doing so will keep the volume of mail down so that people don't get overwhelmed and can stay focused. This is NOT a list for debate about the Second Amendment or the merits of gun control. There are plenty of other lists for that. This list is for people who choose to work on the "Gun Control and Olympics" problem. The list owner (me) reserves the right to remove subscribers who persist in violating the list rules after adequate notice of violation has been given. To subscribe to the Nolympics list, send a message to: majordomo@aros.net In the body of the message put: subscribe nolympics You will then get further instructions and full information by return mail. You can unsubscribe at any time, so consider joining us! (Expect some minor delays, since I'm sure there are some bugs I haven't found yet!) If you have your own web page, _please_ consider linking to the Nolympics site - http://www.therighter.com/column/Olympics.html. In other news, it has now come to light that the Salt Lake Olympics bid committee spent $10,000 on - you guessed it! - FIREARMS which were given to various International Olympic Committee members prior to Salt Lake City being named as the site for the 20 02 Olympics. Whether these very expensive rifles and shotguns were "gifts" or "bribes" will ultimately be decided by those investigating alleged bribery by the Olympic bid committee, but half of them were "billed after the IOC enacted rules that barred its members fr om receiving gifts worth more than $50 initially and later $150". And whether the recipients of these firearms are even allowed to possess them in their own countries is unknown, since the list of recipients hasn't been released. The rifles and shotguns were manufactured by Utah's famed Browning firearms. You can read the story at: http://www.sltrib.com/1998/dec/12191998/utah/68433.htm Now, it's shameful enough that there are allegations of bribery surrounding the Salt Lake City Olympics. It's even worse when that alleged bribery involves "gifts" of firearms to officials who are actively working to subvert the right of Americans to ke ep and bear arms. Apparently these officials believe that wealthy, elitist Olympics officials have the right to firearms, but ordinary American citizens, even those who have been subjected to a rigorous background check, do not "deserve" that same right . But it's even worse... Those of you who have ever purchased a firearm are no doubt familiar with the BATF's Form 4473 (a permanent record of all firearms transfers which the BATF somehow maintains is _not_ gun registration), without which one cannot pur chase a firearm from a manufacturer, dealer or Federal Firearms Licensee. Question 9a asks: "Are you the actual buyer of the firearm listed on this form? If you answer 'no' to this question, the dealer cannot transfer the firearm to you." I've been told that this question is intended to prevent a person from buying firearms and transferring them to people who may not legally purchase them. Yet it appears that the SL Olympics bid committee folks not only purchased firearms not intended for their own personal use, they transferred them to persons not legally permitted to pur ch Were the IOC officials who received the firearms eligible to purchase them? Probably not. The BATF has this to say on the subject: "An alien who is legally in the United States will be considered to be a resident of a State for the purpose of complying with the GCA if he has resided in that State continuously for at least 90 days before purchasing a firearm. Note, however, that even a legal resident alien who has lived in the U.S. for many years will have to wait 90 days before purchasing a firearm if he changes his State of residence. "Alternative to the 90-day Standard "An alien legally in the United States and who has been authorized in writing by the principal officer of an embassy or consulate to purchase a firearm would be considered a resident of the State where the embassy or consulate is located for purposes of purchasing a firearm. "The Federal firearms licensee must attach the letter of authorization to the completed Form 4473 and retain it as part of the permanent records." Falsifying Form 4473 in any way is a federal felony, but I haven't heard a word about the BATF investigating Olympics officials. I guess they're too busy stemming the tide of highly dangerous bayonet lugs. But I know _I'd_ love to see those Form 4473' s. Wouldn't you? You might consider calling your local BATF office (maybe anonymously!) and asking why they're not investigating these probably illegal firearms purchases. You might even enlist some HCI members who will no doubt be _horrified_ that such things are allow ed to happen! Of course I don't think that _anyone_ should have to fill out those wretched forms, or pass background checks to purchase a firearm. But if Americans have to be subjected to such onerous laws, then so should visitors to this country. I know of no Olymp ic nation that will allow an American to carry firearms while in its territory. The whole thing's appalling. Olympic officials are allowed to buy guns illegally, transfer them illegally, and all the while they're insisting that law-abiding Americans must be forceably disarmed. So far no bills concerning gun control and the Olympics have been filed, which is to be expected. Any such bill will likely be negotiated behind closed doors and passed without opportunity for public comment or debate. But rest assured - Utah legislat ors are not "asleep at the wheel". Anti-gun Senate President Lane Beattie has filed a bill request entitled "Criminal Penalty for Drive-By Shooting". And all this time I thought drive-by shootings were _already_ illegal! Then again, maybe the new bill will exempt Olympics officials..... This will likely be the last post to The Righter dealing with the Olympics problem. So if you're interested, please join the Nolympics list, and if you're not interested, things will get back to normal with a New Year's column on Wednesday or Thursday. Thanks to all of you for your support and patience! Best wishes for a Happy New Year! Sarah Sarah Thompson, M.D. http://www.therighter.com Stop the Gun Ban! NO-lympics 2002! Check out http://www.therighter.com/column/Olympics.html And now you can link directly to the Nolympics page too! ------------- To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to righter-list-request@aros.net with the line unsubscribe righter-list in the body. ================================================================== Charles C. Hardy --text only no attachments ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] ----END FORWARDED MESSAGE---- -- Charles C. Hardy | If my employer has an opinion on | these things I'm fairly certain 801.588.7200 (work) | I'm not the one he'd have express it. "The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant." -- John Stuart Mill, "On Liberty" 1859 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "S. Thompson" Subject: Utah Shooting Sports Site Date: 04 Jan 1999 15:08:09 -0700 Forwarded from John Spangler of USSC: NOTICE TO ALL USSC BOARD MEMBERS AND OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES- The Utah Shooting Sports Council (USSC) web site is now open at: UtahShootingSports.org You are requested to pass this address to anyone who might be interested. USSC material is currently the bulk of the material on the site, but Mr. Kevin Angus is working on adding other sections of interest to competitive shooters in Utah. We think this will be a good mix and be mutually beneficial. USSC material is aimed at presenting information related to legislative matters of interest to those who legally own and use firearms. It also provides information about gun safety, firearms sports, gun collecting and other related topics for people with varying degrees of knowledge or interest in firearms. This site is currently being developed and admittedly needs some work to make it more user friendly. YOUR SUGGESTIONS will be most welcome!! Comments, complaints, corrections, suggestions, or praise should be sent to John Spangler jhspang@ix.netcom.com John Spangler=97Serving Collectors and Students of Firearms and Military History. Antique and Collectable Firearms and Militaria Headquarters http://oldguns.net - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: Pro-gunner for Newt's Seat Date: 05 Jan 1999 11:00:41 -0700 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Tue, 05 Jan 1999 10:04:40 -0700 Received: from smtp3.erols.com by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id JAA11175; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 09:50:28 -0700 Received: from gunowners.org (207-172-73-64.s64.tnt1.man.erols.com [207.172.73.64]) by smtp3.erols.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) with SMTP id LAA05480; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 11:42:22 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199901051642.LAA05480@smtp3.erols.com> Reply-To: Gun Owners of America X-Mailer: Gun Owners of America's registered AK-Mail 3.0b [eng] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline RE: Pro-gunner for Newt's Seat. Gun Owners of America Political Victory Fund January 5th, 1999 Dear Friend of the Second Amendment: Like you, I was delighted when Newt Gingrich announced his resignation, both as Speaker of the House and as Representative for Georgia's Sixth Congressional District. Newt did a lot of damage to your gun rights: 1) Newt sank the pro-gun Smith amendment 2) Newt passed the Lautenberg gun ban 3) Newt passed the anti-gun "Terror" bill 4) and the list goes on and on. Now you and I have a chance to elect a true pro-gun member of Congress in Newt's place. Dr. Christina Jeffrey (a professor at Kennesaw State University in Georgia) has recently announced her candidacy for this seat. CHRISTINA JEFFREY IS MORE THAN JUST A PRO-GUN LADY -- SHE'S A GUN RIGHTS ACTIVIST LIKE YOU AND ME. THE OTHER CONTENDER IS A PROVEN ANTI-GUNNER AND A PROVEN LOSER: former Georgia State Senator Johnny Isakson (R-Marietta). He's already lost twice in two attempts to step up to higher office. The bottom line is Christina Jeffrey's campaign needs to raise $150,000 immediately. The election will most likely be held sometime in February -- just 6 weeks away. The election will be over before you know it. So please, send the most generous contribution you can: $1,000, $500, $250, $100 or whatever you can afford to: "CHRISTINA JEFFREY FOR CONGRESS" P.O. BOX 1445 KENNESAW, GA 30144 Christina Jeffrey's opponent is a multi-millionaire with a long anti-gun history. As State Senator, Johnny Isakson co-authored the Handgun Control, Inc. version of the so-called Georgia "Brady Registration" bill. In 1993, Mr. Isakson got it passed through the Georgia Senate. But gun rights activists in Georgia managed to kill it later in the Georgia House of Representatives. Unfortunately in 1995, the so-called "Brady Registration" passed into law in Georgia. Johnny Isakson also pushed to let cities and counties all over the state impose 3-day waiting periods. When that didn't fly, he voted to let local governments impose gun control on their own citizens or people driving through. Fortunately, local gun control didn't pass either. The bottom line is: As bad as things are now, if Johnny Isakson had his way, they'd be much worse. Now, Johnny Isakson wants to move up to the U.S. Congress. As you know, anti-gunners got a big boost in the 1998 elections -- thanks largely to Newt Gingrich's contempt for pro-gun voters who had put Republicans in control of Congress back in 1994. That's why it's vital that you join me to help stop anti-gun Johnny Isakson from being elected to Congress. Mr. Isakson must be stopped now, or he may forever be a knife in our back. You see, Georgia's Sixth Congressional District is overwhelmingly Republican. The Democrats have never been able to win there. That's why this time the Democrats are running their man as a Republican. Johnny Isakson has been endorsed by the Georgia Democrats' party leader: Governor Zell Miller, a close friend of Bill Clinton. Other bosses are lining up behind the Governor. And liberal fat cats are pouring money into Mr. Isakson's war chest in an attempt to buy the election. But they've got one big problem: they don't know who they're up against. I know Christina Jeffrey, and let me tell you: she's a rare breed. Christina was born in 1947 at Fort Bliss, Texas, the daughter of a career United States Army officer. Eldest of eight children, she excelled at everything she did, from her classwork to being a champion swimmer. Christina won numerous scholarships, married in college, yet still managed to achieve the near impossible feat of getting her Ph.D. while working and raising four children. Christina began her academic career as Assistant Professor at Troy State University and she's been moving up ever since. She's been twice elected President of the American Society of Public Administration Georgia Chapter. Christina's one of the top experts in her field -- which is management of government. CHRISTINA CAN MAKE BUREAUCRATS SWEAT BULLETS. The liberals in Washington are nervous at the very thought of seeing the full power of the Office of a Congressman in the hands of somebody like Dr. Jeffrey. I've met with her on a number of occasions recently. She radiates graciousness and charm. One thing that's consistently surprised me about Christina Jeffrey is how tough she is: No matter what's put in her way, she jumps the hurdle and keeps on fighting. I think the word that best describes Christina Jeffrey is "formidable." IN SHORT, MY YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN WASHINGTON HAVE CONVINCED ME THAT WHAT WE HAVE IN CHRISTINA JEFFREY IS THE ANTI-GUNNERS' WORST NIGHTMARE: A HARDLINE FEMALE PRO-GUN CHAMPION. You and I've got a rare opportunity to take a wide-open Congressional seat in a conservative district. And we're facing a hack politician: a Democrat in Republican drag. Meanwhile, wherever she goes in the district, Christina is surrounded by excited voters who sense something is happening. Women and young people love her; the only thing I know to compare it with is the Jesse Ventura phenomenon that swept Minnesota this fall. This race is ours to win. That's why I've helped Christina retain two of the best professionals in the field to organize her campaign and manage the scores of enthusiastic volunteers who are turning out to work for her. Her team has prepared a winning plan to defeat Johnny Isakson: a grass-roots program that takes the message straight to the people. We can't be stopped, no matter how much money Mr. Isakson squanders on TV. But unlike in Minnesota, where the state had to pay $300,000 in public funding to Jesse Ventura's campaign, this time the government won't be giving her a dime. And you know Christina's teacher's salary won't be enough to do the job. HERE'S HOW YOU CAN HELP: As I said, this is a rare opportunity to capture a great prize: an open congressional seat. You and I can help win it if we raise money for the Christina Jeffrey campaign. The Christina Jeffrey campaign needs to raise $150,000 immediately. That's why I'm asking you to make a rare gift, more than you'd ordinarily give. This is because of the great benefits you and I will reap when Dr. Jeffrey defeats anti-gun Johnny Isakson and goes to Washington as a constitutional leader and a champion for gun owners. Please send the most generous contribution you can: $100, $250, $500, or whatever you can afford. Remember the maximum legal limit for direct campaign donations is $1,000 per person. For example a husband and wife can give $1,000 each for a total of $2,000. Please make your check or money order payable to: "CHRISTINA JEFFREY FOR CONGRESS" Mail your check or money order right away to: CHRISTINA JEFFREY FOR CONGRESS P.O. BOX 1445 KENNESAW, GA 30144 Please write somewhere on your check or money order the word "GOA" so Christina will know exactly where her support is coming from. Also, if you give $200 or more, please write in the memo area of your check your occupation and employer. As you know, for disclosure purposes, election laws require campaigns to report that information. I hope you will give as much as you can. I also hope you will mail your contribution today. The election will most likely be held sometime in February -- just 6 weeks away. Newt has said he'll resign effective January 3rd, and the election is expected 30+ days after that. Christina needs to hear from you right away so she can plan effectively. Please respond, there is no time to lose. Yours for the Second Amendment, Larry Pratt P.S. The special election to replace Rep. Newt Gingrich who is retiring from Congress will be held soon. Please act quickly to help pro-gun leader Dr. Christina Jeffrey. She needs your help to raise money for her campaign to defeat anti-gun politician Johnny Isakson. Please mail your contribution today. ******************************** Paid for and Authorized by Gun Owners of America Political Victory Fund 8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408 E-Mail: goamail@gunowners.org http://www.gunowners.org - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: Fw: CNN "Guns Under Fire" POLL and Hatchet Job...... Date: 05 Jan 1999 13:22:56 -0700 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Tue, 05 Jan 1999 13:07:35 -0700 Received: from www55.linkexchange.com by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id MAA11407; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 12:53:29 -0700 Received: (qmail 29840 invoked by uid 100); 5 Jan 1999 20:05:13 -0000 Mailing-List: ListBot mailing list contact membercouncil-help@listbot.com Delivered-To: mailing list membercouncil@listbot.com Received: (qmail 24188 invoked from network); 5 Jan 1999 20:05:03 -0000 Received: from pop01.globecomm.net (206.253.129.185) by www61.linkexchange.com with SMTP; 5 Jan 1999 20:05:03 -0000 Received: from default (tam-fl11-08.ix.netcom.com [206.214.117.136]) by pop01.globecomm.net (8.9.0/8.8.0) with SMTP id PAA24277 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 15:04:50 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <002d01be38e6$bb520220$8875d6ce@default> Reply-To: "Charles E. Hoskinson" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=_1A4DB3A2.45244954" --=_1A4DB3A2.45244954 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Member Council of Tampa Bay - http://home.tampabay.rr.com/membercouncil -----Original Message----- Sherman ; Paul Payne ; Joel = Partridge ; ILA EVC NRA ; Gary Nalband ; Paul Longo ; = Steve Loban ; Steve Kendrick Cybershooters ; Scott Hoffman ; William Frenchu ; Damian R. Eads ; Fairfield Cty Second Amend = ; Robert Crook CNN Online is trying to do a hatchet job on the Gun Industry & the Cities = Lawsuit stuff....... =20 AND- there's a "poll" on whether gun mfgrs. are "responsible"... =20 You know what to do....(vote in the poll..!!!!) =20 and you may forward this message ad infinitum... =20 The URL is: http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/1998/guns/overview/ =20 Get going, troops !!! =20 Gregory ______________________________________________________________________ To unsubscribe, write to membercouncil-unsubscribe@listbot.com Start Your Own FREE Email List at http://www.listbot.com/ --=_1A4DB3A2.45244954 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Part.001" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Part.001" PCFET0NUWVBFIEhUTUwgUFVCTElDICItLy9XM0MvL0RURCBXMyBIVE1MLy9FTiI+DQo8SFRNTD4N CjxIRUFEPg0KDQo8TUVUQSBjb250ZW50PXRleHQvaHRtbDtjaGFyc2V0PWlzby04ODU5LTEgaHR0 cC1lcXVpdj1Db250ZW50LVR5cGU+PCFET0NUWVBFIEhUTUwgUFVCTElDICItLy9XM0MvL0RURCBX MyBIVE1MLy9FTiI+DQo8TUVUQSBjb250ZW50PSciTVNIVE1MIDQuNzIuMjEwNi42IicgbmFtZT1H RU5FUkFUT1I+DQo8L0hFQUQ+DQo8Qk9EWSBiZ0NvbG9yPSNmZmZmZmY+TWVtYmVyIENvdW5jaWwg b2YgVGFtcGEgQmF5IC0gaHR0cDovL2hvbWUudGFtcGFiYXkucnIuY29tL21lbWJlcmNvdW5jaWwN Cg0KDQo8RElWPiZuYnNwOzwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBmYWNlPUFyaWFsIHNpemU9Mj48Qj4t LS0tLU9yaWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLTwvQj48QlI+PEI+RnJvbTogDQo8L0I+R3JlZ29yeSAm bHQ7PEEgDQpocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86Z21lYWRzQG1haWwyLm5haS5uZXQiPmdtZWFkc0BtYWlsMi5u YWkubmV0PC9BPiZndDs8QlI+PEI+VG86IA0KPC9CPkpvZSBUYXJ0YXJvICZsdDs8QSBocmVmPSJt YWlsdG86Z3Vud2Vla0Bhb2wuY29tIj5ndW53ZWVrQGFvbC5jb208L0E+Jmd0OzsgDQpCcnVjZSBT dGVybiAmbHQ7PEEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOmJpZ3Nob3RzQGp1bm8uY29tIj5iaWdzaG90c0BqdW5v LmNvbTwvQT4mZ3Q7OyANClJhbHBoIFNoZXJtYW4gJmx0OzxBIA0KaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOmF0dHlA cmFscGhkc2hlcm1hbi5jb20iPmF0dHlAcmFscGhkc2hlcm1hbi5jb208L0E+Jmd0OzsgUGF1bCBQ YXluZSANCiZsdDs8QSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86bnJhdXNtY0BpeC5uZXRjb20uY29tIj5ucmF1c21j QGl4Lm5ldGNvbS5jb208L0E+Jmd0OzsgSm9lbCANClBhcnRyaWRnZSAmbHQ7PEEgDQpocmVmPSJt YWlsdG86anBhcnRyaWRAaXgubmV0Y29tLmNvbSI+anBhcnRyaWRAaXgubmV0Y29tLmNvbTwvQT4m Z3Q7OyBJTEEgRVZDIE5SQSANCiZsdDs8QSANCmhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpOUkEtSUxBLUVWQ0BrZW5k YWNvLnRlbGVieXRlLmNvbSI+TlJBLUlMQS1FVkNAa2VuZGFjby50ZWxlYnl0ZS5jb208L0E+Jmd0 OzsgDQpHYXJ5IE5hbGJhbmQgJmx0OzxBIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpwcm5hbGJhbmRAc25ldC5uZXQi PnBybmFsYmFuZEBzbmV0Lm5ldDwvQT4mZ3Q7OyANClBhdWwgTG9uZ28gJmx0OzxBIGhyZWY9Im1h aWx0bzpwbG9uZ29AZXJvbHMuY29tIj5wbG9uZ29AZXJvbHMuY29tPC9BPiZndDs7IFN0ZXZlIA0K TG9iYW4gJmx0OzxBIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpzbG9iYW5Ad2lzaS5jb20iPnNsb2JhbkB3aXNpLmNv bTwvQT4mZ3Q7OyBTdGV2ZSANCktlbmRyaWNrIEN5YmVyc2hvb3RlcnMgJmx0OzxBIA0KaHJlZj0i bWFpbHRvOmN5YmVyc2hvb3RlcnNAbWFpbC1pdC5jb20iPmN5YmVyc2hvb3RlcnNAbWFpbC1pdC5j b208L0E+Jmd0OzsgU2NvdHQgDQpIb2ZmbWFuICZsdDs8QSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86aG9mZmd1bkBh b2wuY29tIj5ob2ZmZ3VuQGFvbC5jb208L0E+Jmd0OzsgV2lsbGlhbSANCkZyZW5jaHUgJmx0OzxB IGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzp3cmZAbmpjYy5jb20iPndyZkBuamNjLmNvbTwvQT4mZ3Q7OyBEYW1pYW4g Ui4gRWFkcyANCiZsdDs8QSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86ZGFtaWFuQGVhZHNlbnQuY29tIj5kYW1pYW5A ZWFkc2VudC5jb208L0E+Jmd0OzsgRmFpcmZpZWxkIA0KQ3R5IFNlY29uZCBBbWVuZCAmbHQ7PEEg aHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOmZjc2FhQGFvbC5jb20iPmZjc2FhQGFvbC5jb208L0E+Jmd0OzsgDQpSb2Jl cnQgQ3Jvb2sgJmx0OzxBIA0KaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOmNjc2N0QGVyb2xzLmNvbSI+Y2NzY3RAZXJv bHMuY29tPC9BPiZndDs8QlI+PEI+RGF0ZTogPC9CPk1vbmRheSwgDQpKYW51YXJ5IDA0LCAxOTk5 IDk6MzAgUE08QlI+PEI+U3ViamVjdDogPC9CPkNOTiAmcXVvdDtHdW5zIFVuZGVyIEZpcmUmcXVv dDsgUE9MTCANCmFuZCBIYXRjaGV0IEpvYi4uLi4uLjxCUj48QlI+PC9ESVY+PC9GT05UPg0KPERJ Vj48Rk9OVCBjb2xvcj0jMDAwMDAwIHNpemU9Mj5DTk4gT25saW5lIGlzIHRyeWluZyB0byBkbyBh IGhhdGNoZXQgam9iIG9uIHRoZSANCkd1biBJbmR1c3RyeSAmYW1wOyB0aGUgQ2l0aWVzIExhd3N1 aXQgc3R1ZmYuLi4uLi4uPC9GT05UPjwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBjb2xvcj0jMDAwMDAwIHNp emU9Mj48L0ZPTlQ+Jm5ic3A7PC9ESVY+DQo8RElWPjxGT05UIGNvbG9yPSMwMDAwMDAgc2l6ZT0y PkFORC0gdGhlcmUncyBhICZxdW90O3BvbGwmcXVvdDsgb24gd2hldGhlciBndW4gDQptZmdycy4g YXJlICZxdW90O3Jlc3BvbnNpYmxlJnF1b3Q7Li4uPC9GT05UPjwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBj b2xvcj0jMDAwMDAwIHNpemU9Mj48L0ZPTlQ+Jm5ic3A7PC9ESVY+DQo8RElWPjxGT05UIGNvbG9y PSMwMDAwMDAgc2l6ZT0yPllvdSBrbm93IHdoYXQgdG8gZG8uLi4uKHZvdGUgaW4gdGhlIA0KcG9s bC4uISEhISk8L0ZPTlQ+PC9ESVY+DQo8RElWPjxGT05UIGNvbG9yPSMwMDAwMDAgc2l6ZT0yPjwv Rk9OVD4mbmJzcDs8L0RJVj4NCjxESVY+PEZPTlQgY29sb3I9IzAwMDAwMCBzaXplPTI+YW5kIHlv dSBtYXkgZm9yd2FyZCB0aGlzIG1lc3NhZ2UgYWQgDQppbmZpbml0dW0uLi48L0ZPTlQ+PC9ESVY+ DQo8RElWPjxGT05UIGNvbG9yPSMwMDAwMDAgc2l6ZT0yPjwvRk9OVD4mbmJzcDs8L0RJVj4NCjxE SVY+PEZPTlQgY29sb3I9IzAwMDAwMCBzaXplPTI+VGhlIFVSTCBpczogPEEgDQpocmVmPSJodHRw Oi8vd3d3LmNubi5jb20vU1BFQ0lBTFMvMTk5OC9ndW5zL292ZXJ2aWV3LyI+aHR0cDovL3d3dy5j bm4uY29tL1NQRUNJQUxTLzE5OTgvZ3Vucy9vdmVydmlldy88L0E+PC9GT05UPjwvRElWPg0KPERJ Vj48Rk9OVCBjb2xvcj0jMDAwMDAwIHNpemU9Mj48L0ZPTlQ+Jm5ic3A7PC9ESVY+DQo8RElWPjxG T05UIGNvbG9yPSMwMDAwMDAgc2l6ZT0yPkdldCBnb2luZywgdHJvb3BzICEhITwvRk9OVD48L0RJ Vj4NCjxESVY+PEZPTlQgY29sb3I9IzAwMDAwMCBzaXplPTI+PC9GT05UPiZuYnNwOzwvRElWPg0K PERJVj48Rk9OVCBjb2xvcj0jMDAwMDAwIHNpemU9Mj5HcmVnb3J5PC9GT05UPjwvRElWPg0KDQpf X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fDQpUbyB1bnN1YnNjcmliZSwgd3JpdGUgdG8gbWVtYmVyY291bmNpbC11bnN1 YnNjcmliZUBsaXN0Ym90LmNvbQ0KU3RhcnQgWW91ciBPd24gRlJFRSBFbWFpbCBMaXN0IGF0IGh0 dHA6Ly93d3cubGlzdGJvdC5jb20vDQo8L0JPRFk+PC9IVE1MPg0K --=_1A4DB3A2.45244954-- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: FEAR: James Bovard's New Book: Freedom In Chains Date: 05 Jan 1999 15:27:11 -0700 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Mon, 04 Jan 1999 16:44:39 -0700 Received: from americium.baremetal.com by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id QAA10367; Mon, 4 Jan 1999 16:30:33 -0700 Received: from localhost (mapinc@localhost) by americium.baremetal.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with SMTP id PAA27123; Mon, 4 Jan 1999 15:41:36 -0800 Received: by americium.baremetal.com (bulk_mailer v1.5); Mon, 4 Jan 1999 23:40:38 +0000 Received: (from mapinc@localhost) by americium.baremetal.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id PAA26819 for fear-list-outgoing@mapinc.org; Mon, 4 Jan 1999 15:40:38 -0800 Message-Id: <199901042340.PAA26819@americium.baremetal.com> Sender: owner-fear-list@mapinc.org Reply-To: Matthew Gaylor Organization: Forfeiture Endangers American Rights http://www.fear.org/ Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline ******************************************************************* FEAR now has a free-form discussion forum at http://www.libertyjournal.com/liberty_forums/index.cfm?cfapp=3D10 courtesy of Patrick Kirkpatrick & the good folk at Liberty Forum ******************************************************************* My friend Jim Bovard is having his new book "Freedom In Chains" released = on February 22 by St. Martin's Press. I'm sure everyone will want to order up this new book and be the first one on your block to get a copy. I'm sure you won't be disappointed. Matt- http://www.jimbovard.com/ Soon to be changed to http://www.jamesbovard.com= Freedom in Chains Publication Date: February 22, 1999 ISBN: 0-312-21441-3 Price: $26.95 Editor: Michael Flamini Contact: Meredith Howard (212) 982-3900 x267 Government and bureaucracies are bigger and more controlling than ever. A citizen's own ability to control his or her own life has never been less than it is today. How did we get to this point? Jim Bovard, bestselling author of Lost Rights: The Destruction of American Liberty, looks at the development of the State into a behemoth that threatens to destroy the individual at the cost of preserving the idea of "statism" - the belief that government is inherently superior to the citizenry, that progress consists of extending the realm of governmental compulsion, and that vesting more arbitrary power in government officials will eventually make citizens happy. Reading through the history of the state and its war on the citizen, = Bovard looks at thinkers as diverse as John Locke, Etienne de la Boetie, James Madison, and Bernard Bosanquet among others. He explores the original version of the idea of the state, the development of the welfare state, = the progress of the state's judicial system from the original province of the courts into the lives of men and women and the ultimate fraud that is perpetrated as the state's benevolence. Freedom in Chains is must reading for anyone trying to understand how far we've come from our eighteenth century roots as a community of impassioned patriots to our sorry = positions as wards of the state at the end of the twentieth century. James Bovard is a journalist who has written for The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and Newsweek. He is the author of Lost Rights: The Destruction of American Liberty (St. Martin's Press, 1994) ************************************************************************** Subscribe to Freematt's Alerts: Pro-Individual Rights Issues Send a blank message to: freematt@coil.com with the words subscribe FA on the subject line. List is private and moderated (7-30 messages per = week) Matthew Gaylor,1933 E. Dublin-Granville Rd.,#176, Columbus, OH 43229 Archived at http://www.reference.com/cgi-bin/pn/listarch?list=3DFA@coil.com= ************************************************************************** ***************************************************** To UNSUBSCRIBE: email majordomo@mapinc.org with this in the body: UNSUBSCRIBE FEAR-list ***************************************************** - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "S. Thompson" Subject: Lawyers Pick Gun Fight Date: 05 Jan 1999 21:18:01 -0700 After Tobacco Success, Lawyers Pick Gun Fight Same Tactics Aimed at Firearms Industry By David Segal Washington Post Staff Writer Tuesday, January 5, 1999; Page A01 For the past four years, a team of about 60 law firms from across the country has rented a suite of offices in downtown New Orleans and made it headquarters for the unprecedented legal assault against the tobacco industry. Last week the offices got a make-over for the launch of a new fight -- this time against the gun industry. Cigarette files are being warehoused. Deploying the same tactics it brought to the tobacco wars, the legal collective known as the Castano Group is re-aiming its sights, hoping to earn millions in fees by suing gunmakers on behalf of cities around the nation. The Castano Group is the brainchild of Wendell Gauthier, a mass-injury lawyer who made the first of several fortunes representing victims of hotel fires and plane crashes. In 1994, he persuaded a group of 60 firms to contribute $100,000 each to fund a war room to coordinate lawsuits against the tobacco industry. The suits were based on the then-novel theory that the cigarette companies should pay for the cost incurred by smokers to treat their addiction. Gauthier is now asking the same and other firms to chip in another $100,000 for the gun litigation. About 40 firms have accepted so far, and others are expected to join soon, said John Coale, a District lawyer who is part of the group. The money will cover the cost of depositions and research, as well as a staff of paralegals and time logged by lawyers at Gauthier's firm. Gun manufacturers, meanwhile, are on the verge of hiring corporate defense firms capable of fending off a carefully orchestrated legal attack on a national scale. Among the leading candidates for the job are several firms, including Washington's Covington & Burling, that have toiled for tobacco companies. In sum, it could be deja sue all over again. The virtually inevitable brawl over the gun business will likely feature many of the same combatants and strategies that took center stage in the epic confrontation over tobacco. "It's uncanny," said Stanley Chesley, a Cincinnati lawyer who is part of the Castano Group, "but we just keep running into the same people in this business." In October, New Orleans became the first city to file suit against gunmakers, demanding re dress for the cost of responding to shootings and alleging that companies such as Glock Inc. and Smith & Wesson Corp. failed to install safety devices that would prevent children and unauthorized users from firing guns. Lawyers from the Castano Group, which takes its name from an early tobacco plaintiff, are handling the case on behalf of the city. Chicago followed with its own suit in November, offering other liability theories, and more cities are expected to file soon. A variety of private actions are in the works, too. For critics of the cigarette settlement, the tobacco lawyers' new onslaught fulfills an unhappy prophecy. Well before cigarette makers agreed in November to pay more than $200 billion over 25 years to settle a host of suits brought by attorneys general, Wall Street analysts and others predicted that the money ultimately would fund new lunges at other industries. The Castano team has yet to profit from the tobacco litigation, because it was not party to the actions by the attorneys general and its private class actions are still pending. Still, Castano lawyers such as Coale expect a tobacco payday and are unabashed about what they'll do with the money. "People kept saying that we would go after the alcohol or fast-food industries next," Coale said. "But we'd never do that. We enjoy liquor and meat too much." Meanwhile, several lawyers who scored big in the suits filed by the attorneys general are eyeing the gun issue. For instance, Robert Kerrigan's eight-person firm in Pensacola, Fla., pocketed $200 million for its work on the tobacco settlement, part of a record-setting $3.4 billion in fees shared by a handful of Florida law firms. He and his partners now are considering whether to sue gunmakers, alleging that products such as assault weapons and Saturday night specials have no legitimate use. "I know the business community considers us a bunch of vultures who just got done with one corpse and are looking for another," Kerrigan said. "But the truth is that tobacco had to pay in no small measure because of what we did." Whether the gun litigation turns out to be the next legal gold rush is an open question. Gunmakers aren't nearly as wealthy as the cigarette makers, taking in about $3 billion to $4 billion a year, a fraction of the big tobacco companies' yearly revenue. And Bob Ricker of the American Shooting Sports Council, a trade association for gunmakers, vowed that his members won't be intimidated into an out-of-court settlement, regardless of how many cities line up against them. Ricker also said the swarm of tobacco plaintiffs' lawyers suggests that the suits against the industry are frivolous, the work of an opportunistic gang of legal predators. "We'll be able to show that what these lawyers are actually after is money," he said, a contention certain to become part of the gun manufacturers' defense. Handgun-control advocates contend that the Castano lawyers were the logical choice to assail gunmakers. After all, they say, these lawyers have the requisite expertise, as well as a history of camaraderie in a similar war. "I think it's a natural move on the part of these firms, because they have a great deal of experience dealing with a well-financed industry that has operated in secret for years, markets a lethal product and makes decisions which increase the risk of serious harm to the American people," said Dennis Henigan, legal director of the Center to Prevent Handgun Violence. Though gunmakers traditionally have fought product liability suits independently, they're now awakening to the seriousness of their predicament and discussing a more unified approach. That includes discussions with a number of established defense firms. For veteran corporate lawyers such as Keith Teel of Covington & Burling, who has worked for all four major tobacco firms, gun companies look as if they could be the Next Big Client. "We, like a lot of firms, would be interested in getting involved with it," Teel said. For now, plaintiffs' lawyers are meeting mayors across the country and offering them what could be an irresistible deal: allowing lawyers to sue gunmakers in the name of their city. The towns could end up with millions in settlement dollars without having to spend any money. And the mayors could get a political boost from electorates fed up with gun violence. Castano lawyers say cities such as Tampa, Newark and Baltimore are interested. Coale said he will approach D.C. Mayor Anthony A. Williams as soon as his administration settles in. "We're going to get as many cities as we can and sue under any product-liability theory that happens to fit that jurisdiction," Coale said. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: SENATORS NEED A LITTLE RELIEF Date: 06 Jan 1999 09:30:52 -0700 SOME OF OUR SENATORS NEED A LITTLE RELIEF Wesley Pruden is editor in chief of The Washington Times. January 5, 1999 Quick, someone call 911. They need an emergency supply of grief counselors = in the United States Senate. Some of the senators are on the verge of = cracking under the stress of duty and the responsibility of accountability.= Nary a one came to Washington at the business end of a shotgun, but from = the public way some of them are parading pity for themselves in the guise = of commiseration for the country a bystander might imagine that none is = here voluntarily. The pain of it. The sheer anguish of it all. Such = delicacy of wounded feeling ennobles us everyone. These are the guys and gals who are terrified they might have to perform = one of the duties of a job that pays $136,700 a year in salary and a = million dollars in perks, freebies, stroking and aides and interns to park = the car, fetch the coffee and peel the grapes. But finally there's a duty = they can't delegate. From all the weeping, wailing and gnashing of = store-bought teeth you might think the aide assigned to warm the toilet = seat on cold mornings called in sick. Trent Lott has become the king of the U-turn, with his deference to the = White House and his on-again, off-again determination to make the Senate = do its bounden duty. He's the current darlin' of the president and the = Democrats, who are blistering their hands in applause for his scheme to = make things as easy as possible for Bill Clinton. Some unkind people are = speculating that Trent is about to switch parties just to keep the = accolades coming. (Why should he bother?) Back home in Biloxi and Tupelo, = Hattiesburg and Hot Coffee they're wondering what skeleton the White House = could be rattling at him. His colleagues on both sides of the aisle are competing to see who can cry = the loudest over making the country bear the "agony," the "ordeal," the = "torment," the "suffering," the "torture," the "pain," the "misery," the = "tribulation," the "grief" of an impeachment trial. The country they're talking about survived a revolution, a brutal = four-year Civil War, two World Wars and smaller wars in Cuba, Korea and = Vietnam and a few assorted financial panics, recessions and a killer = depression, but if all 100 members of the Senate have to get up before = noon to go to work as jurors to listen to the evidence, as set out in the = Constitution, we're supposed to be afraid the rivers won't run, the tides = won't work, the fish won't bite, the bacon won't fry, the beans won't = boil, the dogs won't bark, the cotton won't grow and the stock market will = crash. The Jerry Springer Nation, toughened by Oprah and hardened by O.J., = naps unchallenged as the world's only superpower, enjoying unprecedented = prosperity in an era of peace with most of us worried only about where to = park the third car. But we'll suffer meltdown if we have to hear about = Monica's thong panties and Bill's cigar -- presumably unlit -- one more = time. Some of the senators think Trent Lott's scheme, borrowed from a couple of = his colleagues, is brilliant: Take a vote first and consider the evidence, = if at all, later when and if it becomes convenient. This strikes a lot of = people, including even a few senators, as dumb and dumber, which demonstrat= es the difference between them and them. "I don't think that the Senate wants to hear a lot of testimony, particular= ly on matters that are well known," says Sen. Thad Cochran, the senior = Republican senator from Alice-in-Wonderland. "Many of us have read the = Starr referral and some of us have seen the videotape before the grand = jury ... It seems to me you don't have to have a long, drawn-out ordeal of = a trial to get the facts before the Senate." Sen. Robert Torricelli, the Democrat from New Jersey, who recognizes fraud = and chicanery when he sees it and knows when to run away from it, has = taken the temperature of the American people and he has a diagnosis: "I = think the American people are sick of the president's self-indulgent acts = and sexual acts. They're also sick of our self-indulgent acts here in = Washington, of liking this process so much we're keeping it going. They = want their system back." The Torricelli prescription, naturally, is = something to enable frightened senators to indulge in duty-dodging. The effrontery of anyone's objecting to Senate self-indulgence is enough = to make a senator sick. "I think the House of Representatives is making a = terrible mistake, in trying to tell the Senate how to do its business," = sniffs Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, and his Democratic colleague from = Connecticut, Chris Dodd, couldn't agree more: "And it is not appreciated = to be dictated, or suggested, by the House or the White House, on how we = ought to do our business. We don't need a backseat driver to tell us how = to do our business." Not only that, they don't need anybody to notice when they would rather = not do their duty, either. Hicks should go back to the sticks and shut up. = That goes for you, me and everybody else. Wesley Pruden is editor in chief of The Times. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: chardy@ES.COM (Charles Hardy) Subject: [A true story--OR--Urban legends combined] Date: 06 Jan 1999 13:34:41 -0700 ----BEGIN FORWARDED MESSGE---- >A friend sent this true story to me: > I know this guy whose neighbor, a young man, was home > recovering from having been served a rat in his bucket of Kentucky > Fried Chicken. So anyway, one day he went to sleep and when he > awoke he was in his bathtub and it was full of ice and he was sore > all over. When he got out of the tub he realized that HIS KIDNEYS > HAD BEEN STOLEN and he saw a note on his mirror that said > "Call 911!" But he was afraid to use his phone because it was > connected to his computer, and there was a virus on his computer > that would destroy his hard drive if he opened an e-mail entitled > "Join the crew!" He knew it wasn't a hoax because he himself was > a computer programmer who was working on software to save us > from Armageddon when the year 2000 rolls around. His program > will prevent a global disaster in which all the computers get > together and distribute the $600 Nieman Marcus cookie recipe > under the leadership of Bill Gates. (It's true-I read it all last week in > a mass e-mail from BILL GATES HIMSELF, who was also > promising me a free Disneyworld vacation and $5,000 if I would > forward the e-mail to everyone I know.) The poor man then tried to > call 911 from a pay phone to report his missing kidneys, but > reaching into the coin-return slot he got jabbed with an HIV-infected > needle around which was wrapped a note that said, "Welcome to > the world of AIDS." Luckily he was only a few blocks from the > hospital-the one, actually, where that little boy who is dying of > cancer is, the one whose last wish is for everyone in the world to > send him an e-mail and the American Cancer Society has agreed > to pay him a nickel for every e-mail he receives. I sent him two e- > mails and one of them was a bunch of x's and o's in the shape of > an angel (if you get it and forward it to twenty people you will have > good luck but ten people you will only have ok luck and if you send > it to less than ten people you will have BAD LUCK FOR SEVEN > YEARS). So anyway the poor guy tried to drive himself to the > hospital, but on the way he noticed another car driving along > without his lights on. To be helpful, he flashed his lights at him and > was promptly shot as part of a gang initiation. And it's a little- > known fact that the Y1K problem caused the Dark Ages. > ----END FORWARDED MESSAGE---- -- Charles C. Hardy | If my employer has an opinion on | these things I'm fairly certain 801.588.7200 (work) | I'm not the one he'd have express it. "That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent *the people* of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms ..." -- Samuel Adams in arguing for a Bill of Rights, from the book "Massachusetts," published by Pierce & Hale, Boston, 1850, pg. 86-87. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: Fight back? Date: 06 Jan 1999 23:58:00 -0700 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Thank you very much Mr. Kemp. I thought I was alone. Nope. You're not alone, you are just in the rarified air of the front. What you see before you are your enemies, the masses of the oppressor facing you. And you see the backs of the rare few who are leading. Look to your sides, and you will see allies in growing numbers. Look behind, and you will see the fearful and *civilized,* hiding from reality. Yet the wise among them know that the time is near when they must either support you, join you in the fight-- the gamble of death or freedom-- or kneel and obey and beg mercy from those who would dominate them. It's a war, isn't it? Don't they say so at every opportunity? And haven't they begun to wage war on the civilians? They caused the war by creating a lucrative market in the natural products of the Lord's earth. The oriental lords of opium and the South American cocaine cowboys, who are criminal profiteers, were half-heartedly targeted. The warlords who created the war first escalated to target the peaceful men and women of the earth, those who till the land with their own sweat and labor and ingenuity to bring forth the Lord's good herb. Now they have brought the war to the man in his home who has a few grams of vegetable leaf and flower, assaulting him and his family and bringing terror and ruin to neighborhoods and families. This is, of course, when they actually attack the house which they intended. And even that is not accidental, for it is a terroristic demonstration of power, a reminder to the cowering sheep that their master is in charge, and that the sheep must remain silent and still. The excuse for the massive military raid on the Seventh-Day Adventist Branch Davidians, a community which had lived in peace with their neighbors for decades, was the flimsiest fiction of a methamphetamine lab. They were good Christian folks, so when they broke the assault and the enemy, shocked and disoriented and out of ammo, begged to medevac and leave, they willingly agreed. This was their only mistake. They didn't realize that it was a war ~on the gentle and the loving, the unresisting. *There are cases which cannot be overdone by language, and this is one. There are persons too who see not the full extent of the evil that threatens them; they solace themselves with hopes that the enemy, if they succeed, will be merciful. It is the madness of folly to expect mercy from those who have refused to do justice; and even mercy, where conquest is the object, is only a trick of war. The cunning of the fox is as murderous as the violence of the wolf, and we ought to guard equally against both.* Thomas Paine, The American Crisis No. 1, December 19, 1776-- the Valley Forge Winter. How much worse off would the Davidians have been, had they stacked a hundred naked ATF corpses on the front lawn of their property, and told Unca Sham to come collect his servants' bodies, and then obliterated those who came for the corpses? After all, they were gassed and burned in their homes for being righteous and merciful. So, folks, realize the full extent of the evil which threatens you. I hear alleged, and on the rarest of occasions, find a *law enforcement* type who is an *honest and decent man.* And these *honest men* turn a blind eye to the cowboy cowards who prey on Us, the People. They are typically older folks, unskilled and hoping for retirement. How honest are they, how righteous are they, to maintain their association with an enterprise gone rogue and criminal? When one flies with crows, one must be prepared to be shot with crows... Juries, carefully selected to be blind, cud-chewing idiots devoid of mind and spirit and conscience, convict their fellow men, imprison them and rob them and destroy their lives for things which they themselves have done and do, because hizzoner the black robed whore tells them to. Hizzoner the whore and his pimp the District Attorney pursue this course for personal aggrandizement. The whore and the pimp are known in the community, stand for election and print flyers with pictures of themselves and their families. The legislators who pander to the lowest of public opinion do the same, as do the mayors and commissioners and sheriffs. Po-leeces put little badges on the tags of their cars, tags which are the symbols of state ownership of the cars which are paid for by the operators but controlled by the state. These little badges, Fraternal Order of Police symbols, are the symbols of immunity, which allow their wives and children and themselves to violate traffic regulations and pass through *roadblocks* with impunity. These criminal predators are known and recognizable; if we are so spineless and lickspittle that we allow them to live fearlessly among us, to prey on us, to live a privileged life as honored and elevated servants of our masters in government, then we deserve our groveling fate. These are the times that try men's souls; the summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country; but he that stands it NOW deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly. 'Tis dearness only that gives every thing its value. Heaven knows how to set a proper price on its goods, and it would be strange indeed, if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated. [Unca Sham] with an army to enforce tyranny, has declared, that [he] has a right (not only to TAX) but to bind us in all cases whatsoever, and if being bound in that manner is not slavery, then is there not such a thing as slavery upon earth. Even the expression is impious, for so unlimited a power can belong only to God. --Thomas Paine, American Crisis No. 1, paraphrased. Has anything changed? William Michael Kemp 1/6/99 repost as desired - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: Responses to Klinton Defenders. Date: 07 Jan 1999 10:37:28 -0700 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Thu, 07 Jan 1999 09:51:58 -0700 Received: from listbox.com by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id JAA13944; Thu, 7 Jan 1999 09:37:47 -0700 Received: (qmail 3441 invoked by uid 516); 7 Jan 1999 16:49:23 -0000 Delivered-To: rkba-co@majordomo.pobox.com Received: (qmail 3294 invoked from network); 7 Jan 1999 16:49:01 -0000 Received: from blackhole.dimensional.com (0@208.206.176.10) by majordomo.pobox.com with SMTP; 7 Jan 1999 16:49:01 -0000 Received: from flatland.dimensional.com (sendmail@flatland.dimensional.com [208.206.176.24]) by blackhole.dimensional.com (8.8.8/8.8.nospam) with ESMTP id JAA04404; Thu, 7 Jan 1999 09:48:45 -0700 (MST) Received: (from telecon@localhost) by flatland.dimensional.com (8.8.8/8.8.nospam) id JAA24148; Thu, 7 Jan 1999 09:48:42 -0700 (MST) Message-ID: <19990107094842.14967@dimensional.com> Cc: rkba-co@listbox.com X-Mailer: Mutt 0.88 Sender: owner-rkba-co.new@majordomo.pobox.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rkba-co@majordomo.pobox.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Posted to rkba-co by telecon ----------------------- -----Forwarded message from John Fussell ----- I am sick of all the lame ass excuses made for the Liar in Chief*President Dangle* and the Vice Perpetrator, Al Gore* Below is a list of excuses Clintonistas give me and my light hearted answers * If you are sick of = their whining and excuses for the actions of Bill Clinton then use them often , you have my permission: 1. This is just about a president having a private affair. This is about the right of a president to molest innocent American women, attack her with taxpayer-paid attorneys if she dares to complain, = and lie under oath to a Grand Jury when she finally gets her day in court. = Where are those civil rights Democrats say they are fighting for! 2. This is just about sex. Rape is just about sex, robbery is just about money, murder is just a misunderstanding. 3. Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinski testified that they didn't have sex = and nobody told her to lie. So, if they both lie, that makes it the truth? 4. According to his personal definition of sex, he doesn't think he lied. So, therefore, he didn't lie. You mean a criminal now has the right to redefine his crime? What a novel legal concept! "I didn't steal the money, I borrowed it. I didn't = rape her, I borrowed her. I didn't kill him, your honor, his head hit my = baseball bat." 5. He may have committed perjury, but he shouldn't be impeached. Tell me, what crime can a president commit? 6. Does this rise to the level of impeachment? Gee, let's see, perjury, obstruction of justice, witness tampering, abuse of power. Impeachment? This rises to the level of jail! At least it did for 327 ordinary American citizens and 89 military men and women last year. 7. The economy is doing great. So, the better the economy, the more crimes he can commit? If we get 5% growth, do we allow a president to knock off a liquor store? And I ask you* besides sign on to Republican ideas WHAT HAS BILL CLINTON REALLY DONE!!!! Better thank Alan Greenspan, the Republican Congress, Republican= Governors, and the few Democrats still with good sense than Bill Clinton. 8. We need his leadership. It's impossible to lead the country when you can't follow the laws of the land. And how can he keep the vows he sworn to as President when he can*t even keep the ones he made to Hillary. We see now he didn*t and can*t. 9. A panel of historians say he should stay in office. A panel of liberal historians from liberal colleges who love liberal presidents and Government money. They know which side their bread is buttered. 10. Distinguished professors say he shouldn't be impeached. The only thing distinguishable about them is their blind love of the Democratic party....and Karl Marx. 11. We should forgive Clinton. I can forgive the drunk bus driver who goes over the cliff with a busload of kids. But, I'll take away his license. Forgiveness and punishment are = to different things. 12. This will put the country through hell. When a president breaks the law, the country goes through hell. Besides = ever notice how rosy the media reports everything as soon as Bill got in = office. I remember if Reagan or Bush went to a city where a thousand people were there to see them all you saw on the evening news was the handful of demonstrators that showed up* CNN=3DClinton News Network, CBS=3DClinton Broadcasting System, ABC=3DAnything But Conservatives 13. This will damage the nation. It already is damaged because of his behavior as President. Oh, so just let the president keep breaking the law. That's better? 14. The Republicans caused this. Bill Clinton caused this. 15. Republicans are just being partisan. Democrats are defending a lawbreaking president from their own part. Who = is being partisan? To the Democrat "fair" means go along with their bankrupt idea*s another 40 years* 16. This is part of a Great Right Wing Conspiracy. The Republicans couldn't organize a barbecue. 17. The Rodino hearings were fair. Rodino was canned because he was blatantly partisan. Fortunately, the = 1970s Republicans were willing to punish a lawbreaking president from their own party. The 1990s Democrats are defending a lawbreaking president from their own party. 18. Hillary has shown what a strong woman she is. If Hillary were a strong woman, she'd have left him. She is a horrible = role model for young women. 19. Other nations are laughing at us. Other nations don't take baths. Other nations let their leaders rape thier women. Others nations use nerve gas on their own people. Other nations = kill citizens who dissent. Other nations suck. America is the greatest nation = on earth because the Constitiution says that we all obey the same laws. 20. The polls show most of the nation wants him to stay in office. The polls didn't support the civil rights laws, either. Should we revoke them? 21. Last election, the people spoke and told us they don't want impeachment= . Bill Clinton wasn't running in the last election. And, if anyone paid attention, there was a 13% swing of women voting towards Republicans. 22. Republicans shouldn't impeach while our troops are in harms way. Bow Wow Wow! 23. Instead of impeachment, we should censure. Censure? For Bill Clinton, that's a checkered flag! Censuring a president isn't even in the Constitution. But since when does a Democrat read the Constitution? The much used "separation of church and state" isn*t either but again when do liberals read the Constitution. 24. Maybe something a little tougher than censure...... A little tougher than censure? OK. We'll make him stand in the corner = during recess. That's tougher than censure. 25. A president shouldn't be above the law, but he shouldn't be below the law. OK. Then give him the same punishment all Americans get when they commit perjury, sixteen months in jail. 26. 40 million dollars and all we have is this? If Clinton told the truth, this investigation would have cost a couple hundred bucks and a box of pizza. 27. He's sorry. He's sorry he got caught. 28. He apologized. He hasn't admitted his crime. 29. He is a popularly elected president. So was Nixon. -----End of forwarded message----- --=20 It takes a Bill Clinton to father a village. If the Constitution meant for people to carry arms for defense, it would have said "The right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" Oh, yeah.... http://www.scientology-kills.net For Help with Majordomo Commands, please send a message to: Majordomo@majordomo.pobox.com with the word Help in the body of the message - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "S. Thompson" Subject: Guns on trial again.. Date: 07 Jan 1999 13:55:57 -0700 http://www.infobeat.com/stories/cgi/story.cgi?id=2557925079-c4d > [INFOBEAT | ][Profile | ][Feedback | ][About | ][Terms | ][Custom] > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > [Image] > [Click on Ad -- Support InfoBeat's Free Services] > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > 01:27 AM ET 01/07/99 > > Gun Industry Accused of Negligence > > Gun Industry Accused of Negligence > By TOM HAYS= > Associated Press Writer= > NEW YORK (AP) _ Nearly five years after 16-year-old Robert > Robles was slain during a fight over a neighborhood baseball game, > his death has raised a high-stakes question in a federal courtroom: > Was it the gun industry's fault? > The families of Robles and six other shooting victims have sued > the firearms industry, accusing dozens of manufacturers and > distributors of feeding an underground market that puts guns in the > hands of criminals. > ``This is a simple case about accepting responsibility,'' > plaintiffs' attorney Elisa Barnes told jurors as the trial opened > Wednesday. > Industry lawyer Anne Kimball countered by labeling the suit an > attempt to ``to shift the blame away from the cold-blooded killers > in this case.'' > The lawsuit _ brought in 1995 by Freddie Hamilton, a Brooklyn > woman whose son was gunned down two years earlier _ is viewed as a > precursor to upcoming legal challenges by cities hoping to recover > the costs of gun violence. > The suit's central claim is that about 30 gun manufacturers and > 15 gun distributors ``oversupply'' certain markets where gun laws > are lax, all the while knowing that the extra guns end up in the > hands of criminals in states with stricter controls _ like New > York. > The plaintiffs are seeking unspecified damages. > Among those expected to testify is Stephen Fox, 19, the sole > survivor among the seven victims. Fox _ who still has a bullet > lodged in his head _ was shot by a neighbor who had bought the > handgun off the black market, Barnes told jurors. > ``I'm going to ask you why was that gun so easily available, out > of the trunk of a car, on a street in Queens,'' she said. > The defense said gun manufacturers should not be held > accountable for criminal sale and use of a heavily regulated item. > ``Guns used in crimes are bad _ we're all in agreement on > that,'' Kimball said. ``Nonetheless, guns are a legal, legitimate > product in America ... This case is not a referendum on handguns.'' > Lawyers for Smith & Wesson Corp., Beretta USA Corp., Ruger & > Co., Accu-Tek and the other defendants also complained that the > plaintiffs have never conclusively linked the weapons used to harm > their relatives to specific gun manufacturers. > But U.S. District Court Judge Jack Weinstein has allowed the > plaintiffs to argue the ``chain of title'' is irrelevant. What > matters, they argue, is that the industry creates a widespread risk > with indiscriminate marketing _ a concept know as collective > liability. > Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley used similar logic in filing a > $433 million lawsuit against the firearms industry late last year. > That suit accuses gun makers of saturating his city with more > weapons than could ever be sold to law-abiding citizens. > New Orleans is pursuing a similar suit, while other cities, > including Los Angeles, Philadelphia and Baltimore, are also > considering taking gun makers to court. > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "S. Thompson" Subject: JAMA Letter to the Editor re: Wintemute et al. Date: 08 Jan 1999 00:55:09 -0700 This is too good not to share...... January 7, 1999 Tom Cole MD Editor, JAMA 550 N. State Street Chicago, IL 60610 Re: Wintemute GJ, Drake CM, Beuamont JJ, Wright MA, Parham CA. "Prior Misdemeanor Convictions as a Risk Factor for Later Violent and Firearm-Related Criminal Activity Among Authorized Purchasers of Handguns." JAMA December 23/30, 1998; 280(24) 2083-2087. Dear Dr. Cole, "In total, during the first eighty years of this century, almost 170 million men, women, and children have been shot beaten, tortured, knifed, burned, starved, frozen, crushed, or worked to death; buried alive, drowned, hung, bombed or killed in any of the myriad ways governments have inflicted death on _unarmed_, helpless citizens and foreigners. The dead could conceivably be nearly 360 million people. It is as though our species has been devastated by a modern Black Plague. And indeed it has, but a plague of Power, not germs."[1] [emphasis added] Gun control advocates, like Wintemute, who incrementally condition us towards a State monopoly on weapons are in denial that the murderous and enormous horror of State crime dwarfs all private crime. Others may dignify Wintemute's latest results-oriented polemic by delineating its myriad flaws. We choose instead to spotlight the utter hypocrisy in JAMA's publication of this inane piece. Would JAMA take it seriously if Neal Knox conducted research funded by Gun Owners of America, published it in The American Rifleman, claimed to support National Rifle Association goals, and was accompanied by an editorial by Charlton Heston? I would think not. So please do not be surprised that we see no "science" when gun ban activists posing as objective researchers, funded by some of the deepest pockets in the gun ban lobby,[2] publish an article purporting to support further gun control in a magazine that proselytizes gun control, all-too-fittingly accompanied by Sarah Brady's editorial. So, Wintemute thinks that society might be served by keeping UC Davis medical students who moon their professors, Lousianans who sell chickens on the Sabbath, and Arkansasans who have oral sex from owning guns. Only for the most serious crimes should we whittle away at the pool of armed Americans who can keep criminals, crazies, and would-be tyrants in awe. Arguably it is America's armed populace that has provided us some protection from the State. Except for the eloquent 1/3 billion dead at the hands of the governments this century, the familiar antics and artifice of these missionaries and propagandists of gun control would be laughable, but instead of laughing, we weep for the dead. Respectfully, Edgar A. Suter MD National Chair Doctors for Integrity in Policy Research Inc. 5201 Norris Canyon Road, Suite 220 San Ramon, CA 94583 USA voice 925-277-0333 FAX 925-277-1568 [1] Rummel RJ. Death by Government. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers. 1994. p.9. [2]According to Foster S. "New Health Foundation Writes Prescription for Big Government." Organizational Trends. Washington DC: Capitol Research Group. August 1996., the innocently-named California Wellness Foundation is the deepest pocket of all gun ban pressure groups, targeting California alone with $25 million (over twice the NRA's national lobbying budget) proselytizing stringent gun control under its also innocently-named "Violence Prevention Initiative." - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: chardy@ES.COM (Charles Hardy) Subject: [Vin_Suprynowicz@lvrj.com: Jan. 8 column -- police raids] Date: 08 Jan 1999 17:13:36 -0700 ----BEGIN FORWARDED MESSGE---- FROM MOUNTAIN MEDIA FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE DATED JAN. 8, 1999 THE LIBERTARIAN, By Vin Suprynowicz Raiding the First Amendment Washoe County sheriff's deputies armed with search warrants raided the three major television stations and the daily newspaper in Reno, Nevada Jan. 6, seeking reporters' notes and copies of videotaped interviews with a man accused of sniping at motorists on Interstate 80. The alleged sniper, Christopher Lee Merritt of Mankato, Minn., was arrested near Las Vegas Monday night, about 12 hours after allegedly shooting one man in the chest (he survives though in serious condition) and hitting five other vehicles on the outskirts of Reno. Once returned to Reno and jailed, Merritt agreed to television and newspaper interviews -- promptly broadcast -- in which he appeared to confess to the shootings. KTVN-TV News Director Ed Pearce said he was surprised and puzzled by District Attorney Richard Gammick's raids. "Our feeling is it's an illegal warrant," Pearce told the Associated Press. "It violates the federal privacy protection act of 1980." Reno Gazette-Journal Publisher Sue Clark-Johnson and Executive Editor Ward Bushee, who at one point were threatened with arrest, agreed to lock their reporter's notes in the publisher's office until a subpoena was issued. Prosecutor Gammick said he sent his men with search warrants rather than subpoenas since subpoenas can't properly be issued until a court date is set. The prosecutor further argued similar television interviews had been erased in the past before his office was able to review them, despite his request that the footage be retained until they could be subpoenaed. But that's a pretty thin excuse for sending storm troopers to trample the First Amendment in all the town's major newsrooms -- especially in the same jurisdiction where newspaper photographers were arrested last year for merely photographing police making arrests during revelry related to Reno's annual classic-car festival. This prosecutor's actions appear excessive, out of control, and vindictive. Yes, authorities have some responsibility to secure any relevant evidence. But a less strong-arm, constitutional request to certify the accuracy of the reports printed or broadcast should have sufficed. Besides, aren't conversations in the visitors' room of the Washoe County jail -- where the tapes and notes in question were made -- already routinely taped by the authorities? Thomas Jefferson famously wrote: "Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter." That is not to say the press is ever perfect, nor that it should be above the law. But when reporters become known as nothing but surrogates for police investigators, then the newspapers will have ceased to be the independent organs of inquiry and oversight which the founders struggled so mightily to preserve -- and for which the press shield laws were enacted in the first place. Of separate concern is the way in which young Mr. Merritt -- who still deserves a legal presumption of innocence, of course -- was apprehended. In a program of random stops for minuscule moving violations which are justified as promoting "drug interdiction" -- that is to say, which are used to justify unconstitutional vehicle searches under false pretenses -- Merritt's truck was pulled over by police north of Las Vegas because the light bulb meant to illuminate the license plate was out. Police saw rifles in the car, and proceeded from there. Now, self-professed student of astrophysics Mr. Merritt appears to be a couple of stars short of a cluster. In his confession interview, he related his actions to the movie "Pulp Fiction" as follows: "Nobody seems to have a problem about two hit men killing people, possibly because it's fictionalized, I don't know. There's not a whole lot of difference between contemplating an act and actually going through with it. If you've already thought about it, that's almost close enough to taking action." (Hmm, let me think: where is this surreal doctrine most commonly advanced, today? In the government schools, perhaps, where voicing violent or sexist ideas is considered just as serious an offense as palpable harassment or discrimination; where "a good try" now receives the same passing grade as a correct answer; and where the merits of sorting lunchroom glass from cardboard are promoted -- even though the janitor later throws it all into the same dumpster -- since what's important is not the actual result, but simply demonstrating one's good intentions?) So it's certainly possible this Gomer's answers to police -- as well as the fact the truck turned out to be stolen -- constituted proper grounds for an arrest. But when Washoe County Sheriff Richard Kirkland gloats, "I overheard some talk radio show the other night lambasting law enforcement for stopping people for having lights out on their license plates. So there," he misses the point by a mile. Of course random stops will catch a few more criminals -- while only stomping on the privacy rights of a few thousand innocent souls for each culprit nabbed. But by the same token, imagine how many more offenses might be turned up if the cops just took to breaking in the front doors of private homes, at random. The point is that America is not supposed to be the most efficient police state possible, but rather a land where personal liberties are always weighed against the convenience of the authorities ... and personal liberties generally granted the upper hand. It's a shame neither Sheriff Kirkland nor prosecutor Gammick seems to understand that. Vin Suprynowicz is the assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas Review-Journal. Readers may contact him via e-mail at vin@lvrj.com. The web sites for the Suprynowicz column are at http://www.infomagic.com/liberty/vinyard.htm, and http://www.nguworld.com/vindex. The column is syndicated in the United States and Canada via Mountain Media Syndications, P.O. Box 4422, Las Vegas Nev. 89127. *** Vin Suprynowicz, vin@lvrj.com The evils of tyranny are rarely seen but by him who resists it. -- John Hay, 1872 The most difficult struggle of all is the one within ourselves. Let us not get accustomed and adjusted to these conditions. The one who adjusts ceases to discriminate between good and evil. He becomes a slave in body and soul. Whatever may happen to you, remember always: Don't adjust! Revolt against the reality! -- Mordechai Anielewicz, Warsaw, 1943 * * * ----END FORWARDED MESSAGE---- -- Charles C. Hardy | If my employer has an opinion on | these things I'm fairly certain 801.588.7200 (work) | I'm not the one he'd have express it. "If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains set lightly upon you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen. - Samuel Adams - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: GSL> Citizen's Protection Act of 1998 (fwd) Date: 13 Jan 1999 12:38:23 -0700 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 08:28:31 -0700 Received: from listbox.com by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id IAA20989; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 08:14:09 -0700 Received: (qmail 21238 invoked by uid 516); 13 Jan 1999 15:25:50 -0000 Delivered-To: rkba-co@majordomo.pobox.com Received: (qmail 21098 invoked from network); 13 Jan 1999 15:25:37 -0000 Received: from chai.pobox.com (208.210.124.35) by majordomo.pobox.com with SMTP; 13 Jan 1999 15:25:36 -0000 Received: from mg2.rockymtn.net (mailserv.rockymtn.net [166.93.205.12]) by chai.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for id 7EC8D110F; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 10:25:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from 166-93-76-68.rmi.net (166-93-76-68.rmi.net [166.93.76.68]) by mg2.rockymtn.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA21621; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 08:11:55 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <199901131511.IAA21621@mg2.rockymtn.net> X-Sender: davisda@shell.rmi.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.1.2 Sender: owner-rkba-co.new@majordomo.pobox.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rkba-co@majordomo.pobox.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Posted to rkba-co by Russel long (by way of Douglas = Davis ) ----------------------- http://thePentagon.com/FullBookJacket ------------ http://GunsSaveLives.com= ---- Russ =20 russ45@primenet.com & russ357@juno.com =20 Criminals are exempt from gun registration and licensing. U.S. Supreem Court, Haynes vs: United States, 1968. Impeach President Klinton, and Bill too. ---- ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Subj: Freedom oriented Bill-Citizen's Protection Act of 1998 dear friends this piece of legislation needs our help. it will help level the playing field with the prosecution and try (i say try) to keep them honest in their pursuit of justice. please forward this email far wnad wide. hope everyone had a great Christmas and have a safe new year. paul topete http://www.pokerface.com/freedom.htm -------------------- X-POP3-Rcpt: paul@ns1 Return-Path: MTaylor603@aol.com Received: from imo20.mx.aol.com (imo20.mx.aol.com [198.81.17.10]) by ns1.21h.com (8.8.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA23142 for ; Sun, 27 Dec 1998 16:11:16 -0500 Friends, STOP Federal Prosecutorial Tyranny Call your Reps! If you have never done it before,=20 CALL THEM ON THIS ONE! MAKE THE TIME! Pass this on to everyone you know! It is time to reign=20 in the over zealous morons who think THEY are in charge=20 and show them that WE THE PEOPLE are in charge!=20 Just do it! Please follow the: Citizen's Protection Act of 1998 as it passes through = the Congressional Hearings and Committees this winter. My sources tell me it = is that it is being watered down by the Senate. The Act is HR 3396 and is also referred to as The McDade-Murtha Bill and = The Citizens Protections Act of 1998. It was attached to the Appropriations = Bill and passed along with that Bill in August.=20 Fortunately, it's sponsers also retained the Bill as HR 3396 and it is = passing along as HR3396 with Congressional Hearings In the Appropriations Bill it is attached as Title 8. This is one of the = best kept secrets of the year. How many of you have read about it in your newspaper? This bill under attack and is opposed by: 1) The Department of Justice 2) The FBI 3) The National Director of Drug Control Policy 4) The Faternal Order of Police 5) National District Attorney's Association 6) National Association of U. S. Attorney Generals 7) many former members of the above associations who are now members of = the House of Representratives. 8) The National Sherrif's Associaiton This Citizen's Protection Act was historically argued on the floor of the House of Representatives for 3 hours on August 5, 1998. This act proposes to limit Federal Prosecutors by telling them: 1) Don't lie to the Court! 2) Don't withhold exculpatory evidence!=20 3) Don't intimidate witnesses or color his testimony! 4) Don't leak information! (How many lives/families/careers have been = ruined by this unethical tactic of the Department of Justice?) 5) Don't buy testimony! 6) Don't offer leniency for testimony! THIS IS A HISTORIC BILL WHICH NEEDS TO BE GUARDED AND PROTECTED BY ANYONE = AND EVERYONE WHO CAN FIND THE TIME TO CALL THEIR SENATOR OR REPRESENTATIVE. IT = WAS CO-SPONSORED BY NEARLY 200 MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE. Unfortunately, we know all too well what can happen to an important bill = with this many National Associations lobbying against it! Dianna Joyce Roberts, Former Candidate, for Chair of the=20 Board of County Commissioners, Multnomah County Portland, Oregon=20 P.S. Use the following toll-free numbers to reach any Congresscritter. Call not only your own, call as many of them that you can. Use this web site to locate any Congresscritter. http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/ 1-800-343-3222 Type in the your zip code and be connected to your Congresscritters office free of charge. Call 1- 800-361-5222, ext 90001 which connects you to the Capitol = Switchboard, where you can request to be connected to the office of any Congresscritter.= TELEPHONE NUMBER TO CONGRESS: 1-800-335-4949 ask operator for your Congresscritter God bless the Republic Death to the New World Order We shall prevail The Empire is on the run We are on the march Sincerely, David E. Parsons Denver,CO Home Page http://members.tripod.com/~DAVIDPARSONS/index.html -------------------------- GunsSaveLives Internet Discussion List This list is governed by an acceptable use policy: http://www.wizard.net/~kc/policy.html or available upon request. To unsubscribe send a message to majordomo@listbox.com with the following line in the body: unsubscribe gsl GUNSSAVELIVES (GSL) IS A PRIVATE UNMODERATED LIST. THE OWNER TAKES NO RESPONSIBILTY FOR CONTENT. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Somebody once said that a liberal's worst nightmare was=20 a self-employed American with a 401K pension, because he=20 didn't want anything from the government except to be left=20 alone. A self-employed person with a 401K and a concealed=20 carry permit will need the government even less. =20 ****************** Firearms, self-defense, and other information, with LINKS are available at: http://shell.rmi.net/~davisda Latest additions are found in the group NEW with alerts under the heading ALERTS. Various shareware programs are archived at: ftp://shell.rmi.net/pub2/davisda=20 ******************** For Help with Majordomo Commands, please send a message to: Majordomo@majordomo.pobox.com with the word Help in the body of the message - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "S. Thompson" Subject: KSL-TV Channel 5 Eyewitness News Date: 14 Jan 1999 23:37:45 -0700 The latest on the shootings in Salt Lake City. Please note that the alleged shooter is believed to have "a long history of psychiatric problems", which means that she couldn't legally possess a firearm, much less obtain a concealed carry permit. In other words, while tragic, this incident has absolutely nothing to do with allowing law-abiding, mentally competent people to carry firearms. But don't expect HCI, Rep. Dave Jones or KSL to recognize this distinction. Sarah Sarah Thompson, M.D. http://www.therighter.com Stop the Gun Ban! NO-lympics 2002! Check out http://www.therighter.com/nolympics And now you can link directly to the Nolympics page and join the nolympics mail list! http://www.ksl.com/dump/news/cc/tshoot.htm > Shooting at KSL & Triad Center > January 14, 1998 > > [Image] Video Report on Shooting at KSL (From Eyewitness [Image] > News Shortly After Incident Ended) > > A heavily-armed woman walked into the KSL lobby about 3:15 this > afternoon, started firing, and before she was done, two people were > injured--one in extremely critical condition. > > Join the News Specialists for all the latest developments and first > hand reports on the shooting here in the Triad Center. > > KSL Special: Eyewitness Account from a KSL Employee > > Special Statement From Eyewitness News > AP Report on Incident: > > SALT LAKE CITY -- A woman carrying a grocery bag filled with bullets > entered a television studio lobby Thursday afternoon and fired a > number of shots while making her way through the building, witnesses > said. > > Salt Lake City Police Chief Ruben Ortega said two people were > injured, one seriously, during the woman's four-floor shooting spree > at the downtown office building housing KSL television and radio > stations. > > Police took De-Kieu Duy, 24, into custody in the fourth-floor > offices of AT&T Wireless Services after company employees tackled > and disarmed her, witnesses said. Police said Duy had targeted KSL > but ended up in the AT&T offices, where her gun jammed. > > "We believe she has a long history of psychiatric problems," said > Sgt. Ken Hansen. > > AT&T employee Anne Sleater, 30, was in surgery at LDS Hospital > Thursday night. She was shot in the head and was listed in extremely > critical condition, spokesman Jess Gomez said. > > KSL building manager Brent Whiteman was shot but not seriously > injured. He was under observation at University of Utah Medical > Center. > > [Image]The incident began at about 3:15 p.m. MST when a woman wearing a > light-colored parka, a hat and shooting range ear protection entered > the KSL lobby and demanded to speak to a reporter, Video West > Productions technical engineer Dan Nestel said. > > When her request was denied, she brandished a 9 mm handgun and began > firing shots in the lobby, Nestel said. > > Nestel saw the woman shoot Whiteman while in the lobby, but > witnesses said Whiteman was only grazed by bullets. > > "She started stalking the lobby," Nestel said. "She shot Brent > bang-bang, real fast, and took off." > > KSL radio employee Mary Kammeyer entered the lobby after hearing > shots and was confronted by the woman. > > "She was saying, 'Newsroom, newsroom, where's the newsroom?"' > Kammeyer said. > > [Image]Kammeyer said she directed the woman in the opposite > direction from the newsroom and then locked the door. KSL > anchor Nadine Wimmer said the woman attempted to force her way into > the newsroom before making her way to other floors in the building. > > "She came in specifically with the intent of shooting someone at KSL > Television," Ortega said. "Her motives are not totally clear, but we > are aware of her history." > > Ortega would not elaborate. > > KSL employees evacuated the building, but the station's regular 5 > p.m. news broadcast was on the air only minutes after its scheduled > time, complete with live reports from outside its studios. > > "She made some comments that she targeted KSL because they had been > harassing her," Ortega said, but that there was no reason to believe > the station had actually been harassing her. > > Police cordoned off the block and several streets around the > building, snarling the afternoon commute. The KSL studios are one > block north of the Delta Center, the home arena of the Utah Jazz, > and three blocks west of the Mormon church's Temple Square. > > [Image] > > | KSL-TV Home Page | Main News Page | - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "S. Thompson" Subject: KSL-TV Channel 5 Eyewitness News Date: 14 Jan 1999 23:50:32 -0700 Read the following. Then imagine the scene if Mr. Wightman or Colleen or Mary Kammeyer or any of the other KSL employees in the area had been carrying a firearm. Do you think the tragic shooting of the AT&T employee would even have occurred? This is a tragedy, but one that certainly could have been mitigated, if not prevented entirely. Sarah http://www.ksl.com/dump/news/cc/whiteman.htm > [Free Appraisal] > > Eyewitness Interview > KSL Shooting > > KSL building manager Brent Wightman was one of the two [Image] > people shot by a woman with a gun Thursday afternoon. > Following is a complete interview with him, as he describes what > happened. > > I was exiting the newsroom area, and walked into the main reception > area. Colleen (main receptionist) and I were discussing something.. > for the life of me I can't remember what. > > I walked toward the main entrance and this person walked by me and > had a shawl wrapped around her. It looked a little suspicious. So I > stood-- I'm a little security minded from the old days-- so I stood > back and she was talking to Colleen. > > I heard Colleen say, 'You want to go to the reception area of news?' > and she says, 'you can't go in there.' The lady stepped back from > the reception desk and reached and brought out a gun and pointed it > right at Colleen, and told her, 'I want to go to the newsroom.' They > were four letter comments. > > She (gunwoman) became more agitated. She turned and saw people on > the second floor atrium looking out. And Colleen-- Colleen Mercy-- > was really cool. She asked her, 'What can we do to help you?' And I > asked her if she wanted to sit down and talk about it. She said, 'I > don't want to sit down.' > > I hollered up to people to call 911. I had my hands in the air. So I > was no hero, I was scared. But I was worried about Colleen. She > asked where the newsroom was, and Colleen pointed towards the > engineering area. I pointed towards the west exit doors that go > outside, because if she walked out there, she couldn't get back in. > > She was spinning around in a circle and was incoherent and talking > to the air. Somebody came out of the north entrance, and hollered to > get back. Then somebody came out of the news reception area and she > backed out. She (gunwoman)walked over and shot the carpet. > > I wasn't doing a lot of talking then, nobody was. She walked towards > [Image]the reception area again, about ten feet away, and she was wheeling > her gun, and I knew she was going to shoot me-- I don't know why. > > [Image] I turned and she nicked me on my right side twice. The > bullet never did enter my skin-- it's like two scratches. I > hugged the floor. She apparently was agitated and walked over to me. > And the only time she ever touched me, she kicked me. She kicked me > in the chest, and yelled 'f this and f that.' > > She ran over to the door to the news reception area, and put four or > five bullets through the window. I was looking, and she reached in > (through the shot-out glass) and opened the doors (to t.v. news > reception area). There are two more locked card-reader doors and she > was kicking them. > > I got up and took off. There were people that were peeking out the > door. I said, 'Let's get our behinds out of here.' And we ran out > the northwest doors. > > I wasn't hurt-- it really didn't hurt. Somebody-- an employee-- > walked me over to North Temple and then a police officer-- > Michelle-- took care of me from there. > > It's really good that Colleen wasn't hurt. She was in my prayers. I > was really worried about (the gunwoman) getting in to either side > (off the main reception area). I pray that the lady that got shot on > the fourth floor will be alright. That's really, really sad. > > When I got out, I was trying to tell everybody I was okay. But when > I ran out, I looked at the reception area. Colleen was really on my > mind and I couldn't see her. I got outside and I thought about-- her > and I had talked about if something happens, to hit the floor, and > get under the reception desk. That's apparently what she did. That > lady's past retirement, and she handled herself beautifully. > > It's almost surreal. I don't know the timing element.It seemed like > 15 minutes. It was probably really five or six minutes. > > I'm fine. Everybody pray for the lady from AT&T. She didn't do > anything to anybody. I certainly hope she pulls through. > > [Image] > > | KSL-TV Home Page | Main News Page | - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "S. Thompson" Subject: Fwd: News Special on Guns & Violence Date: 14 Jan 1999 23:52:01 -0700 Friday at 6 PM MST >To: Multiple recipients of list brassroots >From: Scott Wood >Subject: Fwd: News Special on Guns & Violence > > >>TalkSpot News will broadcast a one hour news special on Guns & Violence on >>Friday, January 15, 1999. Our show is on-line at >>http://www.talkspot.com/events/gunsAndViolence. We would love to have your >>members participate in the chat-portion of our show...and give their >>opinions. We put on a balanced program, giving time to both sides of the >>issue....and look forward to having you log on! Could you please pass >>along the following description with link to your members via e-mail...or by >>a link on your site? >> >>thanks >> >>[][[[[[ >> >>Guns & Violence... Who Is To Blame? >> >>Cities across the country are pointing the finger at gun >>manufacturers...accusing them of putting guns in the hands of criminals. >>Lawsuits are pending in several cities and many are asking "Who is really at >>fault?" Should the focus be on the criminals who use the guns...or the >>manufacturers? >> >>Talkspot News will take an in-depth look at both sides of the issue...log on >>at http://www.talkspot.com/events/gunsAndViolence, Friday, January 15,th 5-6 >>pm PST...and let your voice be heard in our chat room! >> >> >>]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] > >>Patty Lane >>News Producer >>TalkSpot.com >> > >Scott Wood > >wood@myblueheaven.com >wood@brassroots.org >scottwood@freedombyfaith.com >progun@flash.net > >http://www.myblueheaven.com >http://www.brassroots.org - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: Clinton's Nixon Problem Date: 15 Jan 1999 10:38:16 -0700 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Fri, 15 Jan 1999 06:50:23 -0700 Received: from www59.linkexchange.com by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id GAA23575; Fri, 15 Jan 1999 06:35:56 -0700 Received: (qmail 23072 invoked by uid 100); 15 Jan 1999 13:47:43 -0000 Mailing-List: ListBot mailing list contact membercouncil-help@listbot.com Delivered-To: mailing list membercouncil@listbot.com Received: (qmail 27138 invoked from network); 15 Jan 1999 13:47:29 -0000 Received: from tas23-atm.tampabay.rr.com (root@24.92.0.73) by www61.linkexchange.com with SMTP; 15 Jan 1999 13:47:29 -0000 Received: from tampabay.rr.com (dt172ncc.tampabay.rr.com [24.92.206.204]) by tas23-atm.tampabay.rr.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8+RoadRunner) with ESMTP id IAA26685; Fri, 15 Jan 1999 08:44:56 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <369F471C.8147FDFC@tampabay.rr.com> Organization: NRA\ILA Member Council of Tampa Bay X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en FSSA , membercouncil , "'Noban'" , "'Tallahassee Rifle and Pistol Club'" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Member Council of Tampa Bay - http://home.tampabay.rr.com/membercouncil The following article is from todays issue of the Federalist Digest I thought you might find interesting and could be used to pressure some of our Senators that voted to impeach Judge Nixon for lying before a grand jury. Does the name Bob Graham ring a bell? The Nixon Problem Clintonistas hate nothing more than being exposed for the hypocrites they are. And for that reason, even the most vociferous Clinton defenders are privately angry with him. Mr. Clinton has repeatedly forced his political syndicate to compromise their dwindling integrity in his defense. This week is no different. As the Senate begins deliberation on Mr. Clinton=B4s impeachment articles, 27 Senate Democrats are facing the =B4=B4Nixon Problem.=B4=B4 We are not referring to President Richard Nixon but to Federal Judge Walter Nixon, who was impeached in 1989 for making a =B4=B4false or misleading statement to a grand jury.=B4=B4 Sound familiar? Mr. Clinton=B4s defenders claim that lying under oath does not =B4=B4rise=B4=B4 to the level of =B4=B4high crimes and misdemeanors.=B4=B4 But 27 Senate Democrats sitting in judgment of Mr. Clinton today voted in 1989 to remove Judge Nixon from office for lying. That presents them with something of a dilemma. On Nov. 3, 1989, Democratic Sen. Herb Kohl of Wisconsin said, =B4=B4One might argue, as Judge Nixon does, that his false statements were not material. ... But Judge Nixon took an oath to tell the truth and the whole truth. As a grand jury witness, it was not for him to decide what would be material. That was for the grand jury to decide. So I am going to vote =B4guilty=B4 on articles I and II. Judge Nixon lied to the grand jury. He misled the grand jury. These acts are criminal and warrant impeachment.=B4=B4 Contacted for comment now, Mr. Kohl had =B4=B4no comment.=B4=B4 Most of the 26 other Democratic Senators who voted to impeach Judge Nixon offered =B4=B4no comment.=B4=B4 A few did respond to inquiries by the journal =B4=B4Human Events.=B4=B4 Fritz Hollings said, =B4=B4I=B4m not going to get into a discussion about 1989.=B4=B4 Ted Kennedy said, =B4=B4I=B4ll give you a comment later on.=B4=B4 Bob Kerrey said, =B4=B4Maybe.=B4=B4 John Kerry said, =B4=B4I have asked my staff for the Judge Nixon record and I haven=B4t made a judgment yet.=B4=B4 Carl Levin said, =B4=B4I=B4m going to adhere to my oath.=B4=B4 Joseph Lieberman said, =B4=B4I=B4ll have to go back and look at the standard I applied.=B4=B4 And John Breaux said, =B4=B4I think we probably will (apply the same standard).=B4=B4 There was, as you might expect, =B4=B4no comment=B4=B4 from Al Gore, who also voted to remove Judge Nixon from office. For the record, the 27 Democrats currently in the Senate who voted to remove judge Nixon are: Sen. Max Baucus of Montana, Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware, Sen. Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, Sen. John Breaux of Louisiana, Sen. Richard Bryan of Nevada, Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia, Sen. Kent Conrad of North Dakota, Sen. Tom Daschle of South Dakota, Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut, Sen. Bob Graham of Florida, Sen. Tom Harkin of Iowa, Sen. Fritz Hollings of South Carolina, Sen. Daniel Inouye of Hawaii, Sen. Teddy Kennedy of Massachusetts, Sen. Bob Kerrey of Nebraska, Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, Sen. Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey, Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, Sen. Barbara Mikulski of Maryland, Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan of New York, Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada, Sen. Chuck Robb of Virginia, Sen. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, Sen. Paul Sarbanes of Maryland, and, of course, Sen. Herb Kohl of Wisconsin. It remains to be seen if the Clinton cadre will, once again, compromise their own oaths. It certainly may be argued that Mr. Clinton=B4s lies, by virtue of his office, are much more serious than those of Judge Nixon. On the other hand, perhaps Judge Nixon should just ask for a recount! -- NRA\ILA Member Council of Tampa Bay Charlie Mealy 727-441-4251 Fax 727-444-4452 Web Site http://home.tampabay.rr.com/membercouncil ______________________________________________________________________ To unsubscribe, write to membercouncil-unsubscribe@listbot.com Start Your Own FREE Email List at http://www.listbot.com/ - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "S. Thompson" Subject: WE HAVE A DREAM! Date: 18 Jan 1999 14:28:06 -0700 WE HAVE A DREAM! We have a dream. Someday, in this great land of ours, people, including even lawyers and political activists, will come to believe character really does matter. We have a dream. We will no longer deify people who plagiarize their doctoral theses. If a man takes the title of Reverend, we'll expect him to honor at least a few of the Ten Commandments. If a married man competes with Hugh Hefner for sexual conquests, we won't feel compelled to listen to his moral wisdom. We have a dream. Someday, black churches in America will not be manipulated as institutional power bases by ambitious black men. We're starting to worry that the good reverends are using the Borgia Popes as their role models. We dream that the day will come when lawyers and politicians stop cynically using race as leverage to increase their wealth and power. We have a dream. Someday, quiet people leading lives of unheralded virtue and real productivity will be honored. Someday all people, black and white, will realize the real heroes aren't the ones giving speeches filled with bombastic rhetoric. Real heroes are quietly doing real work: building houses, writing software code, nursing the elderly, parenting the young -- the whole cornucopia of human endeavor that actually results in better lives for real people. We have a dream. Someday holidays will really matter, instead of serving as crass, meaningless tools of political correctness. People will actually give thanks on Thanksgiving. Christians will actually celebrate the birth of Christ on Christmas. New Year's Day will mean something other than recovering from a hangover and watching football on the tube. We have a dream. Someday Americans will realize there's something perverse about the idea of devoting an equal amount of time, and supposedly reverence, to: - a single civil rights leader - all of America's presidents including founding fathers like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson - and the thousands of men and women who have died defending the United States in wartime. Yet we have one day for Presidents Day, one day for Memorial Day, and one day to celebrate the life of Martin Luther King, Jr. We have a dream. Although we're as sentimental as the next fool, we hope that someday we'll all realize early death does not qualify one for sainthood. Whether it be John F. Kennedy, Marilyn Monroe, Elvis Presley, Princess Diana, or Martin Luther King, dying young may be the road to legend, but hardly a guarantee that the life was worth remembering, much less celebrating. Our final dream is that the day will come in America when one can criticize black cultural icons without being labeled a racist. We call this the impossible dream. --------------- We first published this essay last year to mark the celebration of Martin Luther King Day. We plan on publishing it annually until America begins celebrating a Come-Back-to-your-Senses holiday. RAGEBACK! Tell us what you think about the celebration of MLK Day http://www.theoutrage.com/rageback/99-01-15.html#soundoff Read what others have to say: http://www.theoutrage.com/rageback/99-01-15.html#rage ************************ QUOTE OF THE DAY! I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. -- Martin Luther King (1929-68), speech in Washington, August 27, 1963 Subscribing and Unsubscribing ---------------------------- If for any reason you need to change your mailing address just unsubscribe your old mailing address and subscribe your new address. You can subscribe and unsubscribe at: http://www.athensnm.net/lists When unsubscribing, remember you must use the same address you used to sign up for the list. Please be sure to include your e-mail address in any correspondence. Thanks for listening, and stay outraged! Copyright 1999, The Outrage - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: More anti-gun laws coming Date: 18 Jan 1999 20:34:00 -0700 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Here we go again--time to write your Congressmen! To email all of Congress at once, go to: Email Congress HR 87 IH 106th CONGRESS 1st Session H. R. 87 To prohibit internet and mail-order sales of ammunition without a license to deal in firearms, and require licensed firearms dealers to record all sales of 1,000 rounds of ammunition to a single person. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES January 6, 1999 Mr. BLAGOJEVICH (for himself and Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary A BILL To prohibit internet and mail-order sales of ammunition without a license to deal in firearms, and require licensed firearms dealers to record all sales of 1,000 rounds of ammunition to a single person. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. BAN ON INTERNET OR MAIL-ORDER SALE OF AMMUNITION WITHOUT A FEDERAL LICENSE TO DEAL IN FIREARMS. Section 922(a)(1) of title 18, United States Code, is amended-- (1) by striking `or' at the end of subparagraph (A); (2) by adding `or' at the end of subparagraph (B); and (3) by adding at the end the following: `(C) except a licensed dealer, to ship or transport ammunition in interstate or foreign commerce; SEC. 2. REQUIREMENT TO RECORD SALES OF MORE THAN 1,000 ROUNDS OF AMMUNITION. Section 923(g)(3)(A) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the 1st sentence the following: `Each licensee shall prepare a report of multiple sales or other dispositions whenever the licensee sells or otherwise disposes of 1,000 or more rounds of ammunition (other than .22 caliber rimfire ammunition, shotgun shells, or primers) to the same person during 1 business day. SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. The amendments made by this Act shall apply to conduct engaged in after the 1-year period that begins with the date of the enactment of this Act. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "S. Thompson" Subject: ALERT: Deseret News needs response Date: 19 Jan 1999 20:37:07 -0700 This story appeared in yesterday's Deseret News. It endorses Rep. David Jones's abominable bill, which would effectively destroy ALL concealed carry in Utah. The bill would ban concealed carry in schools, churches, Olympic venues and even in the privacy of your OWN home. We desperately NEED to respond to this article! Please take the time to respond to: letters@desnews.com. Talking points: 1. Armed citizens DO prevent violent crime, as demonstrated conclusively by Dr. John Lott and Dr. Gary Kleck. 2. The "statistical reality" alleged by the Deseret News that: "The likelihood of such a life-threatening incident is considerably less than the chance of accident or misuse." is not a statistical reality. It is a lie. There is no evidence at all that the likelihood of an accident is greater than the likelihood of being a victim. 3. Opinion is neither logical nor factually correct. 4. Schools and Olympic venues are PUBLIC property and may not lawfully deny citizens rights that are guaranteed by both the constitution and existing law. 5. Owners of private residences should be able to decide for themselves whether to ban firearms. They have that ability under current criminal trespass law. Rep. Jones's bill would make it illegal for you to carry a firearm on your own property or to allow someone else to do so. 6. The Deseret News is comparing apples and oranges. That criminals use guns is in no way relevant to the lawful carrying of firearms by good citizens. The truth is that no holder of a CCW has EVER committed a violent crime involving a firearm. Likewise, airline fatalities are not relevant to the discussion. More people die of adverse reactions to legally prescribed medications than die of firearms injuries. Should we also ban prescription medications, or maybe doctors? 7. Permit holders SHOULD feel threatened by being forceably disarmed whenever they plan to visit a school, church, Olympic event, or the home of a friend or relative. Criminals will target these people precisely because they know they are disarmed. 8. There is no such thing as an "appropriate restriction" of Constitutional rights guaranteed by the Utah Constitution as well as the Second Amendment. 9. Had ANYONE at KSL had a lawfully concealed firearm, the two people injured by a mentally ill woman would likely not have been injured. It should not be possible for one sick person to terrorize an entire building full of innocent people without any opportunity for those people to defend themselves. I'd suggest choosing one or two talking points and writing a response to this ill-thought-out editorial. It looks like we've got our work cut out for us! Thanks! Sarah The following story appeared on deseretnews.com on January 18, 1999, 12:00 AM MST ======== Headline: Keep schools, churches gun-free Author: Deseret News editorial An overwhelming number of Utahns advocate the obvious -- guns should be kept out of schools and churches. We concur. But handgun advocates have a strong counterpoint: If concealed weapons are banned from schools, churches, hospitals or anywhere else, then someone with evil intentions could prey upon unarmed pupils, parishioners or patients with impunity. They could inflict serious harm or death without fear of return fire. Most potential violators, however, probably already feel that way. The other main argument against any restriction is that criminals will ignore a ban, so it would only penalize the law-abiding citizenry. Both notions give pause for reflection, but they are outweighed by statistical reality. The likelihood of such a life-threatening incident is considerably less than the chance of accident or misuse. That logical opinion is shared by 90 percent of Utahns who believe all weapons should be banned from public schools. Eighty-six percent think guns -- including concealed weapons -- should be kept from churches. Three-fourths want firearms prohibited from Olympic venues in 2002. While 58 percent feel they should be kept out of private businesses open to the public. Utah House Minority Leader Dave Jones, D-Salt Lake, will sponsor a bill this legislative session that would allow school administrators, Olympic venues, churches and owners of private residences to ban all weapons. Those prohibitions are not unreasonable. There are moments, certainly, when a person could wish he or she was armed. The odds of such an incident are less, however, than the chance of accidental shooting or of having a person's own weapon used against him or even causing a confrontation to escalate into a shootout that kills other innocents. There is no need for such risk in schools or places of worship. All weapons should be kept from the premises. The United States leads the world in firearm fatalities at 14.24 people per 100,000 because of the prevalence of easily accessible guns. A country saturated with guns increases the likelihood of misuse. Fatalities in the United States are five to six times higher than in Europe or Australia or New Zealand, and 95 times higher than in Asia. If such a death rate were prevalent in the aviation industry, planes would promptly be grounded until the problem was fixed. Foods with those kinds of health odds would be banned in a day. Recognizing that, the issue of appropriate restrictions on guns is a sensitive one given Second-Amendment considerations. There are many responsible and reasonable owners of concealed-carry permits in Utah who are well-trained and safe. They should not feel threatened by leaving their weapons at the door when entering schools, churches or some homes. The vast majority of their time is still open to being armed, if desired. ---------- Copyright 1999, Deseret News Publishing Co. leg-alerts is owned and distributed by Sarah Thompson, M.D. The opinions in this alert represent those of the list owner only, unless otherwise attributed or specified. To subscribe to leg-alerts send a message to: majordomo@aros.net in the body of the message put: subscribe leg-alerts PLEASE REMEMBER THAT YOU CANNOT POST TO THIS LIST! Send comments, alerts, suggestions, etc. to: righter@therighter.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "S. Thompson" Subject: INFO: RKBA Date: 20 Jan 1999 15:02:51 -0700 An amazing list of links to articles we can use to defend our right to keep and bear arms. I haven't checked them all yet (not even most of them), but Rick is a reliable source of information. Sarah It occurred to me that you might like to have some more links that expose lies from Kellerman, Sugarman and the like. These are the raw URLs from my "Dezinformatzia Debunked!" section of my future webpage. Enjoy! Rick http://www.ca-rkba.org/ncrkba/violence.txt http://www.ca-rkba.org/ncrkba/schaffer.txt http://dailynews.yahoo.com/headlines/ts/story.html?s=v/nm/19981231/ts/cities_3.html http://www.grnc.org/may97/lyingiia.htm http://www.albany.net/~cheshmat/Lauren/present3.html http://www.netside.com/~lcoble/18.html http://www.ncpa.org/pi/crime/crime51.html http://rkba.org/research/rkba.faq http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-284.html http://www.pulpless.com/stopsamp.html http://www.guntruths.com/index.html http://www.disinfo.com/ http://www.arcrafts.com/think/Legal/suterrx.html http://amfire.com/afistatistics/general.html http://www.junkscience.com/nov98/lottgun.htm http://www.founding.org/clearing.html http://www.2ndlawlib.org/journals/tennmed.html http://www.economist.com/3qrEgbt3/editorial/freeforall/current/ld5233.html http://www.assiniboinec.mb.ca/user/downes/fallacy/index.htm http://carmen.artsci.washington.edu/propaganda/home.htm http://www.conspire.com/newt.html http://www.lib.uchicago.edu/~llou/guns.html http://www.boortz.com/pontific.htm http://www.toledoblade.com:80/editorial/letters/8k23lett.htm http://www.toledoblade.com:80/editorial/edit/8k23fole.htm http://www.thestar.com/thestar/back_issues/ED19980501/news/980501NEW02b_CI-YOUTH1.html http://www-cgi.cnn.com/US/9810/15/school.violence.01/ http://teapot.usask.ca/cdn-firearms/Kates/prohib.fails http://rkba.org/letters/suter.kellerman.home-invasion http://amfire.com/afistatistics/children.html http://www.aloha.net/~davidht/koloa/refstats.htm http://usa-patriot.net/domvil.html http://www.accessatlanta.com/ajc/crime/index.html http://www.accessatlanta.com/ajc/crime/ http://www.umsl.edu/~libweb/edlib/edstats/n96html/n07a.htm http://www.av.qnet.com/~harv/stats.htm http://www.ncpa.org/hotlines/juvcrm/eocp2.html http://www.saf.org/cgi-bin/wwwwais?getdesc=yes&host=wais.mainstream.net&port=210&source=second_amendment&searchprog=waissearch&selection=none&docnum=5&keywords=rem+7600 http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/98oct/clintec.htm http://www.claremont.org/wheeler3.htm http://www.shadeslanding.com/firearms/hci_nazi.html http://www.ultranet.com/~eclipse/hci-doc.html Unsorted websites - Mix of Leftwing mindset/tactics and more debunking Apologies in advance for doubles or deadlinks. RV http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/7006/psychopolitics.html http://www.mojones.com/MOTHER_JONES/JF94/sugarmann.html http://www.phillynews.com/daily_news/98/Aug/11/local/GUNN11.htm http://www.prepcom.org/ http://csf.colorado.edu/cgi-bin/mfs/24/csf/web/psn/marx/Archive/1848-NRZ/nrz50.html?26#mfs http://www.gn.apc.org/Reality/polemic/strat.htm http://www.founding.org/column37.html http://www.enviroweb.org/cco/right/ http://csf.Colorado.EDU/psn/marx/ http://csf.colorado.edu/cgi-bin/mfs/24/csf/web/psn/marx/Archive/1847-CL/1850-add01.txt?280#mfs http://www.best.com/~jdulaney/marxblue.html http://garnet.berkeley.edu:3333/EDINlist/.educ/.youth/CCO/ucpinfo/swnm/guide1/rwindex.html http://www.survival.com.mx/hci.html http://www.prepcom.org/low/index.html http://www.theaustralian.com.au/masthead/theoz/state/4167320.htm http://www.access.digex.net/~croaker/batflies.html http://www.post-gazette.com/win/default.asp http://ls.wustl.edu/WULQ/75-3/753-4.html#fnB18 http://www2.hawaii.edu/~rummel/DBG.CHAP1.HTM http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPcap/1998-11/15/064r-111598-idx.html http://www.jbs.org/tna/1994/vo10no07.htm http://www.heartland.org/gcps.htm http://www.asahi-net.or.jp/~zj5j-gttl/guns.htm http://www.ozemail.com.au/~confiles/overseas.html http://home.pacbell.net/dragon13/policeguns.html http://www.dsausa.org/rl/Docs/Lingo.html http://www.armscontrol.org/ http://www.newsday.com/ap/rnmpwh07.htm http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_exnews/19981221_xex_un_plans_glo.shtml http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_btl/19981223_xcbtl_executive_.shtml http://www.jeremiahproject.com/prophecy/nomorals.html http://www.pledge.org/ http://www.fema.gov/y2k/ http://communities.msn.com/outdoors/magazines/firearms/1/australia.asp http://www.pbs.org/thinktank/transcript.210.html http://www.scruz.net/~kangaroo/L-harvardberkeley.htm http://www.uniblab.com/collie/gunnotes.html http://www.uniblab.com/collie/guncontrol.html#back http://www.un.org/Depts/ddar/index.html http://www.pcvp.org/firearms/guncntn2.html http://www.WorldNetDaily.com/bluesky_smith/19990119_xcsof_clintons_w.shtml http://www.prepcom.org/text/pc5/index.html -- The Right to Self Defense is a Fundamental Human Right - RKBA - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: Date: 21 Jan 1999 12:56:55 -0700 Received: from slc-smtp.utah-inter.net ([206.107.178.5]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Thu, 21 Jan 1999 12:43:48 -0700 Received: from server (tc1-13.utah-inter.net [208.14.200.23]) by slc-smtp.utah-inter.net (Post.Office MTA v3.1.2 release (PO205-101c) ID# 0-0U10L2S100) with SMTP id AAA320; Thu, 21 Jan 1999 12:40:49 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19990121123217.007fe100@utah-inter.net> X-Sender: verbose@utah-inter.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) ajgaunt@xmission.com,asitmain.bgrant@state.ut.us,jackbooted@urjet.net, ldnewby@juno.com,verbose@utah-inter.net,lpltd@sprintmail.com, steves@mail.aros.net,rpm@ceramatec.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Here are the e-mail addresses for the legislature. Enjoy! Gadair@le.state.ut.us (Gerry Adair) Jalexand@le.state.ut.us (Jeff Alexander) eallen@le.state.ut.us (Edgar Allen) rallen@le.state.ut.us (Ron Allen) sallen@le.state.ut.us (Sheryl Allen) eanderso@le.state.ut.us (Eli Anderson) parent@le.state.ut.us (Patrice Arent) lbaca@le.state.ut.us (Loretta Baca) lbeattie@le.state.ut.us (Lane Beattie) tbeck@le.state.ut.us (Trisha Beck) rbecker@le.state.ut.us (Ralph Becker) cbennion@le.state.ut.us (Chad Bennion) Bigelow.Ron.WVC@Juno.com (Ron Bigelow) jbiskups@le.state.ut.us (Jackie Biskupski) Lblackha@le.state.ut.us (Leonard Blackham) dbourdea@le.state.ut.us (Duane Bourdeaux) dbowman@le.state.ut.us (DeMar Bowman) abradsha@le.state.ut.us (Afton Bradshaw) mbrown@le.state.ut.us (Mel Brown) kbryson@le.state.ut.us (Katherine Bryson) pbuckner@aol.com (Perry Buckner) jbuffmir@le.state.ut.us (Judy Buffmire) dbush@le.state.ut.us (Don Bush) cbuttars@le.state.ut.us (Craig Buttars) mcarlson@le.state.ut.us (Mary Carlson) bchard@utah-connections.com (Blake Chard) dcox@le.state.ut.us (David N. Cox) gcox@le.state.ut.us (Gary Cox) gcurtis@le.state.ut.us (Greg Curtis) gdavis@le.state.ut.us (Gene Davis) mdayton@le.state.ut.us (Margaret Dayton) mdillree@le.state.ut.us (Marda Dillree) mdmitric@le.state.ut.us (Mike Dmitrich) cduckwor@le.state.ut.us (Carl W. Duckworth) bevans@le.state.ut.us (Beverly Ann Evans) mevans@le.state.ut.us (Mont Evans) bferry@le.state.ut.us (Ben C. Ferry) ffife@le.state.ut.us (Fred J. Fife) lfrandse@le.state.ut.us (Lloyd Frandsen) kgarn@le.state.ut.us (Kevin Garn) dgladwel@le.state.ut.us (David Gladwell) bgoodfel@le.state.ut.us (Brent Goodfellow) jgowans@le.state.ut.us (James Gowans) khale@le.state.ut.us (Karen Hale) nhansen@le.state.ut.us (Neil A. Hansen) wharper@le.state.ut.us (Wayne Harper) thatch@le.state.ut.us (Thomas Hatch) phellewe@le.state.ut.us (Parley G. Hellewell) nhendric@le.state.ut.us (Neal Hendrickson) jhickman@le.state.ut.us (John Hickman) lhillyar@le.state.ut.us (Lyle Hillyard) dhogue@le.state.ut.us (Dave Hogue) kholdawa@le.state.ut.us (Kory M. Holdaway) bhollada@le.state.ut.us (Bryan Holladay) Showell@le.state.ut.us (Scott Howell) jhull@le.state.ut.us (Joseph Hull) diverson@le.state.ut.us (Dennis Iverson) bjohnson@le.state.ut.us (Bradley Johnson) kjohnson@le.state.ut.us (Keele Johnson) djones@le.state.ut.us (David Jones) ljones@le.state.ut.us (Lorin Jones) pjulande@le.state.ut.us (Paula F. Julander) bking@le.state.ut.us (Brad King) pknudson@le.state.ut.us (Peter C. Knudson) skoehn@le.state.ut.us (Susan Koehn) blockhar@le.state.ut.us (Becky Lockhart) amansell@le.state.ut.us (Al Mansell) emayne@le.state.ut.us (Ed Mayne) rmontgom@le.state.ut.us (Robert Montgomery) kmorgan@le.state.ut.us (Karen W. Morgan) rmuhlest@le.state.ut.us (Robert Muhlestein) jmurray@le.state.ut.us (Joseph Murray) lnelson@le.state.ut.us (Lowell Nelson) hnielson@le.state.ut.us (Howard Nielson) eolson@le.state.ut.us (Evan Olson) lpace@le.state.ut.us (Loraine Pace) mpeterso@le.state.ut.us (Millie Peterson) spoulton@le.state.ut.us (Steven Poulton) trowan@le.state.ut.us (Tammy Rowan) Csaunder@le.state.ut.us (Carl Saunders) jseitz@le.state.ut.us (Jack Seitz) Rshort@le.state.ut.us (Ray Short) lshurtli@le.state.ut.us (LaWanna ""Lou"" Shurtliff) richard.siddoway@m.k12.ut.us (Richard Siddoway) gsnow@le.state.ut.us (Gordon Snow) msnow@le.state.ut.us (Marlon O. Snow) tspencer@le.state.ut.us (Terry Spencer) dsteele@le.state.ut.us (David Steele) mstephen@le.state.ut.us (Martin Stephens) nstephen@le.state.ut.us (Nora Stephens) hstephen@le.state.ut.us (Howard Stephenson) mstyler@le.state.ut.us (Michael Styler) psuazo@le.state.ut.us (Pete Suazo) jswallow@le.state.ut.us (John Swallow) jtanner@le.state.ut.us (Jordan Tanner) mthrockmor@le.state.ut.us (Matt Throckmorton) atyler@cc.utah.edu (Lamont Tyler) dure@le.state.ut.us (David Ure) jvalenti@le.state.ut.us (John Valentine) mwaddoup@le.state.ut.us (Michael Waddoups) rwalsh@le.state.ut.us (Richard Walsh) gway@le.state.ut.us (Glenn Way) bwright@le.state.ut.us (Bill Wright) dzolman@le.state.ut.us (David Zolman) - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "S. Thompson" Subject: Gun Suits Date: 21 Jan 1999 22:51:52 -0700 http://www.infobeat.com/stories/cgi/story.cgi?id=2558122623-37f ---------- ---------- 06:20 PM ET 01/20/99 Survivor To Testify in Gun Trial Survivor To Testify in Gun Trial By TOM HAYS= Associated Press Writer= NEW YORK (AP) _ Weeks before Steven Fox was nearly killed, he watched a friend buy a small, black handgun out of the trunk of a blue Oldsmobile from a man who said he had just come from ``down south.'' About a month later, the friend accidentally shot Fox in the head with the illegal pistol, Fox testified Wednesday in a federal lawsuit accusing the firearms industry of negligently marketing handguns. The case has drawn comparisons to recent lawsuits against the tobacco industry. It's also viewed as a test case for several large cities that have sued or plan to sue gun makers. Fox, 19, is the sole survivor among seven shooting victims named in the class-action lawsuit. His testimony that the dealer ``said he just came back from down south'' was meant to bolster the central claim that the firearms industry is ``collectively liable'' for shootings. The industry oversupplies Southern states, which have lenient gun laws, knowing that the excess will end up on the black market in strict gun states like New York, the lawsuit says. Judge Jack Weinstein cautioned jurors that Fox's story about the illegal gun peddler was not evidence that the weapon _ which was not recovered _ came from the South. The more than three dozen defendants, including Smith & Wesson Corp. and Colt's Manufacturing Co., argue that blaming the industry for the illegal use of a legal product is unfair. Industry executives comply with a host of federal and local gun regulations, contract only with reputable distributors and supply markets based on legitimate demand, their lawyers said. Lawyers for the shooting victims' relatives cast them as underdogs in a battle against cold corporate interests. Fox said that his friend accidentally shot him while showing off the gun Nov. 14, 1994, in his New York City neighborhood. Fox said he has had to relearn how to walk, feed himself, even read and write. ``It's like I just forgot everything,'' he said. ``It's like it just spilled out of my head.'' - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: Bishop may be in trouble for mixing partying and politicking Date: 21 Jan 1999 20:44:00 -0700 Only non-voters can be paid lobbyists? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Gun-control group says GOP chairman may be guilty of felony The gun-control group pursuing vendetta, he says By Bob Bernick Jr. Deseret News political editor A local gun-control advocacy group says Utah Republican Party Chairman Rob Bishop could be guilty of a third-degree felony because he holds a top GOP job and is a paid lobbyist at the same time. Bishop says he has done nothing wrong. He accuses those making the charge against him, Utahns Against Gun Violence, of being out to get him because he lobbies for the Utah Shooting Sports Council, a major gun rights group that is a constant foe of Utahns Against Gun Violence. Bishop is considered a formidable lobbying foe - for several years in a row, attempts to tighten the state's concealed weapons permit law have failed in the Legislature - with the Utah Shooting Sports Council taking the lead in opposition to stricter gun control laws. "Yes, we are concerned" about Bishop's legal standing because he is a tough person to beat on gun issues at the Legislature, says William Nash, chairman of Utahns Against Gun Violence and author of a letter sent to Bishop and Republican leaders in the state outlining Bishop's possible legal problems. "We see (Bishop), with his influence and expertise, and former (House) speaker Mel Brown as the major obstacles against responsible gun legislation," Nash said Wednesday morning. Bishop is also a former House speaker. House Minority Leader Dave Jones, D-Salt Lake, is sponsoring a bill in the current session to ban all guns from churches, public schools, Olympic venues and private residences, if the property owners so wish - a measure sure to be controversial, once again. Nash says that Bishop should resign as party chairman or cease being a paid lobbyist. Nash gives Bishop and state GOP leaders until Friday to make up their minds and take some action, or, he writes, he will go public with his group's complaint. "I take that as a kind of blackmail," Bishop said Tuesday. Nash said he doesn't expect to hear from Bishop. Come Friday, Nash's group will make public their concerns and start notifying Bishop's lobbying clients and those Bishop is lobbying against. "We read the law to say that those who are paying (Bishop) to lobby are violating the law as well," and so could also be guilty of a third-degree felony. "Not only should the Utah Shooting Sports Council be concerned (they are employing Bishop), but the bankers should be concerned as well. For Mr. Bishop is lobbying for the credit unions" over the controversial issue of credit union/bank competition, said Nash. Bishop couldn't say exactly what he'd do, but added he doesn't believe he's violated any law - "certainly not the spirit of any law" - and he may seek changes in the current statutes to make that clear. Nash says in his letter that state law clearly says that no one may give money to a "public servant, party official or voter" in an effort to influence their action, opinion, recommendation or vote. The law also says that no public servant . . . party official, candidate or voter may solicit or accept any money from someone knowing that that person is trying to influence them. Since Bishop is a party official and, at the same time, accepts money as a paid lobbyist to push certain causes, it's clear he's taking money and is influenced altogether, says Nash. Hinting at the Olympic scandal and some legislators' problems, Nash writes: "At a time when there has been a discouragingly long stream of ethical, moral and legal wrongdoing by individuals who have been given a public trust, the Utah citizenry is not in the mood to countenance further actions by persons in official positions who are on the wrong side of the law." Bishop said if he is guilty under "a technicality" of the law (he believes the law was never meant to apply to a person who is both a party official and a lobbyist at the same time), then there are many others under a cloud also. He said several GOP county party officers also lobby the Legislature. In addition, Bishop said all 5,000 state GOP delegates are considered "party officials" under the party's bylaws. How many of them are paid to lobby the Legislature or local county and city officials on behalf of their businesses or trade associations he can't say, said Bishop. But Bishop's position is clear, says Nash. "This should be a simple matter of fairness: A company or an organization with a legislative position or agenda to pursue should not be able to "buy" the voice of an individual political party official such as Mr. Bishop," writes Nash. Being a lobbyist and party chairman is a "dual role (that) is precisely the type of behavior that the statute was designed to prohibit," says Nash. Bishop's term as GOP chairman ends this May. It's tradition in the Utah Republican Party that the top GOP elected officials seeking re-election in the next year get to recommend who the party chairman will be. In 2000, that will be Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and GOP Gov. Mike Leavitt. Bishop says if they want him to serve another two years as party chairman, he'd seriously consider doing so if he also has GOP rank-and-file support. A high school AP history teacher by profession, Bishop also said he plans to maintain his part-time lobbying work. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: theadlanti-paramilitarytrainingstatute 1/3 Date: 21 Jan 1999 20:44:00 -0700 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- gopher://gopher.well.sf.ca.us/11s/Politics/activist.tools/how.to.win THE ADL ANTI-PARAMILITARY TRAINING STATUTE UPDATE Due to the ADL's ANTI-PARAMILITARY TRAINING STATUTE, the Unorganized Militia is NOW ILLEGAL in at least 24 states of the union. Of course this is unconstitutional, but when has this ever stopped the commissars from locking people down and up? That is right, in case you did not know, the ADL, a foreign "Israeli" terrorist, NKVD/CHEKA/STASI/KGB offshoot, spying, free speech denying, propaganda and hate spewing platoon of goons, also CREATES STATUTORY LAW for YOU, in the USA both state and federal according to their own documents and what others research shows. The ADL is part of the secret Masonic B'nai B'rith cult, and is HQed @ 823 United Nations Plaza, New York, NY 10017. That's right, part of the UN, despite "Israel's" SCOFFING of NUMEROUS UN Resolutions against it. The silly fools in the UN actually believed that the UN applied to "Israel" too! What many do not realize is that this statute has effectively, albeit unconstitutionally, DESTROYED the LEGAL UNORGANIZED MILITIA and reduced all participants to FELONS in the TWENTY FOUR (24) US states where this heinous legislation has already passed as of 1995! If you doubt it, read on. The statute is provided below for one of the 24 states as well as the ADL template that was used to ramrod this vile poisonous "legislation" down our throats. Notice carefully in the statutes that you don't actually have to carry out an act of civil 'disobedience' to be convicted, you only need to have been training someone, or being taught in what could be construed as a technique that 'could' be used in an act of civil 'disobedience'. Also note that this is enough to stop many people from even considering associating with the constitutionally provided for unorganized militia, let alone private survivalist clubs, alas the purpose of this leaven laced 'genocidal' human life hating legislation. Do you think this will ever be used against the JDL? I should note that the JPFO [Jews for the Preservation for Firearms Ownership] and I both agree that the ADL is a great threat to all people including honorable Jews as well. In today's communique, you will see how the ADL has drafted and had passed THE ADL ANTI-PARAMILITARY TRAINING STATUTE in 24 States already. They targeted state legislatures to avoid federal constitutional objections and to include both trainers and trainees! I will provide one of the 24 states' statute that was implemented based on the ADL's "model" statute, by way of the ADL's infamous rabid pressure and blackmail techniques. Make no mistake, the ADL has singlehandedly done MASSIVE damage to your Constitutional Rights, and their actions may actually lead to MASSIVE bloodshed because of their success in disarming the American people, leaving them defenseless to the Commissars who will now be able to line us up like so many millions of Christians who were slaughtered at the hands of the atheist jewish Bolsheviks under Leon Trotsky [real name LEVI BRONSTEIN, from NY's East Side believe it or not] and Lenin [real name was Vladimir Ilich Israel Blanc Ulianoff], and the innocent jews sold out by jewish nazis. The following should be researched: http://204.107.208.2/~ralph/hitlerfounderofisrael.html I will also provide the ADL's template statute and the ADL's rationale and insider stategies for implementing this crushing legislation. You should also look up the "CIVIL 'DISOBEDIENCE' ACT", 18 U.S.C. 231 et seq. FIRST the ADL's TEMPLATE: ADL MODEL PARAMILITARY TRAINING STATUE A. (1) Whoever teaches or demonstrates to any other person the use, application, or making of any firearm, explosive, or incendiary device, or technique capable of causing injury or death to persons, knowing, or having reason to know or intending that same will be unlawfully employed for use in, or in furtherance or, a civil disorder; or (2) Whoever assembles with one or more persons for the purpose of training with, practicing with, or being instructed in the use of any firearm, explosive or incendiary device, or technique capable of causing injury or death to persons, intending to employ unlawfully the same for use in, or in furtherance of, a civil disorder- Shall be fined not more than $_____ or imprisoned not more than ___ years or both. B. Nothing in this section shall make unlawful any act of any law enforcement officer which is performed in the lawful performance of his official duties. C. As used in this section: (1) The term "civil disorder" means any public disturbance involving acts of violence by assemblages of three or more persons, which causes an immediate danger of or results in damage or injury to the property or person of any other individual. (2) The term "firearm" means any weapon which is designed to or may readily be converted to expel any projectile by the action of an explosive; or the frame or receiver of any such weapon. (3) The term "explosive or incendiary device" means (a) dynamite and all other forms of high explosives, (b) any explosive bomb, grenade, missle, or similar device, and (c) any incendiary bomb or grenade, fire bomb, or similar device, including any device which (i) consists or or includes a breakable contianer including a flammable liquid or compound, and a wick composed or any material which, when ignited, is capable of igniting such flammable liquid or compound, and (ii) can be carried or thrown by one individual acting alone. (4) The term "law enforcement officer" means any officer or employee of the United States, any state, any political subdivision of a state, or the District of Columbia, and such term shall specifically include, but shall not be limited to, members of the National Guard, as defined in section 101(9) of title 10, United States Code, members of the organized militia of any state of territory of the United States, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or the District of Columbia, not included within the definition of National Guard as defined by such section 101(9), and members of the Armed Forces of the United States. [ Continued In Next Message... ] - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: theadlanti-paramilitarytrainingstatute 2/3 Date: 21 Jan 1999 20:44:00 -0700 [ ...Continued From Previous Message ] MONTANA's IMPLEMENTATION of the ADL LEGISLATION: [notice the exception for LABOR UNIONS/Communists, so it is ok for the Communists to teach each other how to and train to beat up, blow up, mow down and intimidate non-union workers? also there is an exception for nonviolent civil 'disobedience', so as long as you lick boots, you are ok, FOR NOW!] [note not all labor unions are necessarily communist] MT ST 45-8-109 MCA 45-8-109 MONTANA CODE ANNOTATED TITLE 45. CRIMES CHAPTER 8. OFFENCES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER PART 1. CONDUCT DISRUPTIVE OF PUBLIC ORDER Current through 1993 Session, Ch. 642 45-8-109. Prohibited activities - penalties - exceptions. (1) A person is guilty of a crime if, with one or more other persons, he purposely of knowingly assembles for the purpose of training in, instructing in the use of, or practicing with any technique or means capable of causing property damage, bodily injury, or death, with the purpose of employing the training, instruction, or practice in a civil disorder. (2) A person convicted of violating the provisions of subsection (1) is guilty of a felony and shall be imprisoned in the state prison for a period not to exceed 10 years or be fined not to exceed $50,000, or both. (3) Subsection (1) does not prohibit: (a) an act protected pursuant to Article II of the Montana constitution; (b) an act of a governmental military force; (c) an act of a peace officer performed in the lawful performance of the officer's duties; (d) an authorized activity of the department of fish, wildlife, and parks; the department of corrections and human services; a law enforcement agency; or the law enforcement academy; (e) training in nonviolent civil disobedience tecniques; (f) lawful self-defense or defense of others or an activity intended to teach or practice self-defense or self-defense techniques; or (g) a facility, program, or lawful activity related to firearms instruction or training intended to teach the safe handling and use of firearms or activities or sports related to the recreational use or possession of firearms. (4) Section 45-8-107 through 45-8-109 do not apply to an employer or employees involved in a labor dispute. END of MONTANA DOCUMENT If you obtain the report below you will see the statutes passed in the other states. Of note, New York's implementation is particulary amusing as it exempts paramilitary organizations formed and operating without interuption since April 23, 1883! Also organized honorably discharged veterans may assemble with arms ONLY on DEWEY DAY and Memorial Day as long as they are accompanied by the Organized Militia and/or the US Armed Forces. DEWEY DAY!? May 1st. Another COMMUNIST EXCEPTION!!! The ADL Anti-Paramilitary Training Statute: A Response to Domestic Terrorism 1995, 57 pages, $5.00 Send us your: 1.Name 2.Mailing Address 3.Name of Publication 4.Check or Money Order (payable to Anti-Defamation League) Mail to Anti-Defamation League Dept. MRC-W 823 United Nations Plaza New York, NY 10017 The phenomenon of domestic terrorism, dramatically and tragically seared on America's consciousness by the destruction [in April 1995] of the Federal Building in Oklahoma City, is sadly not new. The Anti-Defamation League has monitored the activities of hate groups in America for over 80 years, and has looked for ways to counteract the threat they pose. One ADL strategy has been to encourage states to enact anti-paramilitary training statutes, which prohibit systematic instruction in exercises comparable to military training, including the use of advanced weaponry, for the purpose of fostering civil disorder. Twenty-four states have now enacted such legislation based on or similar to a model ADL initially proposed more than a decade ago. In light of the recent tragedy in Oklahoma, which has in particular highlighted the threat posed by the militia movement, ADL is publishing this new report on our anti-paramilitary training legislation. We believe this legislation can play a significant role in deterring future acts of domestic terrorism, and encourage all those states which do not presently have such laws to enact them expeditiously. The hate groups that the ADL statute targets are characterized by a propensity for lawlessness and violence. Recent events reveal that the most extreme of them regard violence as necessary in the face of what they perceive to be impending Federal tyranny. Many of these groups admit that they are seeking to establish the groundwork for militant resistance not only to gun control laws, but more broadly to the Federal government and its law enforcement agencies. Some groups have already gone so far as to conduct paramilitary training with organized instruction in weapons handling and combat tactics. According to the doctrine of these extremists, the Federal government is the enemy, an enemy engaged in expanding its authoritarian control and planning warfare against its citizenry. The training is interspersed with anti-government and conspiracy-laden propaganda stressing the need to be armed and ready for an impending war perpetrated by the Federal government. [ Continued In Next Message... ] - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: theadlanti-paramilitarytrainingstatute 3/3 Date: 21 Jan 1999 20:44:00 -0700 [ ...Continued From Previous Message ] In an October 1980 publication, ADL documented the proliferation of paramilitary training camps then being operated by the Ku Klux Klan and other racist groups in clandestine training centers across the country, including the states of Alabama, California, Connecticut, Illinois, North Carolina and Texas. The report disclosed that training being provided at these camps was sophisticated and rigorous. In Texas, for example, the training included tactical maneuvers, military drills, map reading and weapons proficiency. [Sounds a lot like the Boy Scouts to me. -- Scott] Louis Beam, then a Grand Dragon of the Texas KKK, boasted that Klan paramilitary training in Texas was more rigorous than that given to U.S. Army soldiers stationed at Fort Hood. Some of these activities were labeled by their sponsors as "defense" or "survival" training courses. Regardless of the label applied, it was clear that armed racists, pathological enemies of blacks, Jews, immigrants, and other minority groups, were engaged in paramilitary training for guerilla warfare against their alleged adversaries. It was the activities described in this report which inspired the ADL Legal Affairs Department to draft model state legislation which would make it illegal to operate such camps. In attempting to provide a legislative solution to this problem, the League drafted a model bill which imposes criminal penalties for weapons instructors and participants in paramilitary training camps. (See Appendix A) In the fall of 1986, ADL issued a report providing a broad introduction to the model anti- paramilitary training statute. At the time, the League cited 13 states that had adopted the model statute or a close facsimile. To date, 24 states have anti-paramilitary training statutes on the books. While paramilitary training by extremist groups was less prevalent in the late 1980s, more recently the proliferation of armed militias has been alarming. Last fall, ADL published a report entitled "Armed & Dangerous: Militias Take Aim At The Federal Government" which documented the growth of such militias throughout the country. The report identified militia activity in the following states: Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio and Virginia. In the intervening time period, the number of states with militia activity has reached 27 and continues to grow. These militias are characterized by vigilant resistance to gun control laws and government "overreaching." Moreover, individuals with histories of racial and religious bigotry are involved in some militias, even in leadership positions. In the Northwest, for example, militia leader John Trochmann has been a featured speaker at an annual Aryan Nations gathering. Investigations into the militias have uncovered stockpiling of lethal weaponry. In addition, many of the militias include paramilitary training as a component of their larger mission. In Michigan, for instance, a brigade of the Northern Michigan Regional Militia established in April 1994 has been conducting training exercises twice a month, reportedly with Chinese SKS semi-automatic assault rifles and other weapons. In March 1995, a member of the "freemen" movement was sentenced by a Roundup, Montana, judge to a ten-year prison term for felonious acts of terrorism in connection with his movement-related activities. Followers of this anti-tax movement argue that they are being deprived of their rights by the Federal government and prefer to live by their own common law court system. John Trochmann, the aforementioned leader of the Militia of Montana, allegedly traveled with five of his followers to Roundup, armed with an arsenal of weapons. "I believe the men were here to attempt to capture or kill us," Musselshell County Attorney John Bohlman told a local reporter. John Trochmann and his five cohorts were arrested, and a search of their vehicles revealed a collection of handguns, rifles, communications equipment, and thousands of rounds of ammunition. Anti-paramilitary training statutes provide law enforcement with another tool that could potentially be used effectively against such groups. They have worked well in the past: a case in point was the reaction of the Christian Patriots Defense League (CPDL), an extremist survivalist group which, beginning in 1979, held propaganda-filled "freedom festivals" where over 1,000 people engaged in military-style field maneuvers and attended some 55 classes, receiving instruction in, among other subjects, "Guns and Reloading," "Demolition and Camouflage," "Anti-Aircraft and Anti-Tank," and "Knife Fighting." In response to Illinois's passage of an anti-paramilitary training statute, the CPDL moved the festival to Kicking, Missouri. Missouri then passed its anti- paramilitary training law, prompting CPDL director John Harrell to warn invitees about the new law and instructing them not to bring their firearms to the camp. Many extremists apparently stayed away from the meeting for this reason. In Florida, shortly after the enactment of the statute, five members of the United Klans of America were arrested by the St. Petersburg Police Department and the Pinellas County Sheriff's office and charged with planning and training for terrorist acts against minorities. One year later, two pleaded guilty and two were convicted by a jury for violating Florida's anti-paramilitary training statute. The goal of the group, according to a police informant, was to incite blacks to riot so that whites would turn to the Klan for leadership. In addition to training with guns intended to be used against minorities, members of the group were instructed in the making of incendiary devices. The statute helped prevent a dangerous situation from escalating into the kind of violence which could easily have led to the loss of innocent life. In North Carolina, violating a Federal court order not to operate an illegal paramilitary organization led to the conviction of the leader of the White Patriot Party (WPP), an armed racist gang. The court order settling a class action civil suit prohibited WPP leader Glenn Miller and his organization from harassing blacks and from violating the state's anti-paramilitary training statute, also based on the ADL model legislation. During a jury trial held in Federal district court in Raleigh, witnesses reported that Miller's group stockpiled weapons and conducted maneuvers for an eventual attempt to overthrow the U.S. government and to create a racist state. Miller was sentenced to six months in prison and three years probation. In light of recent events involving the "militia movement," the usefulness of anti-paramilitary training statutes for law enforcement agencies could not be more apparent. ---------- END of ADL REPORT [The unorganized Militia is LEGAL according to the US CODE, see US CODE TITLE 10 Section 311 http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/10/311.html] US CODE TITLE 10 Section 311 311. Militia: composition and classes http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/10/311.html - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: Further On Taft Shooting Date: 21 Jan 1999 20:44:00 -0700 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Forwarded from another list ... I have no idea how we all seem to have missed this, but this link came by way of a British shooting list that I am on. I'm pasting the text of the article here - but its worth going to the site because there are photos, which I saved as jpg's. First is the text from the Brit list - it asks the proper questions. The most glaring problem with the police explanation is that the safety on the .45 is on......Mike P ------------ You might find this interesting: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_exnews/19981211_xex_who_fired_fa.shtml It is an account of the Taft shooting in California. The illustration of the 1911 the guy is supposed to have shot himself with is most peculiar. It seems to show a 1911 with the hammer down and the safety on. Now maybe I'm out of date but none of mine would have done that. The gun is also supposed to be in exactly the state it was after the guy shot himself - with the hammer down!!! Kenneth Pantling (with thanks to Chris Morgan for the URL). -------[Cybershooters website & subscription info]-------- ARMED AND DANGEROUS Who fired fatal shot? Second autopsy, photos spell discrepancies in Taft shooting death By Sarah Foster 1998 WorldNetDaily.com Death scene: Indicator sign with #1 shows location of handgun.TAFT, Calif. -- Any one of the four bullets found in his body could have caused the death of Taft gun store owner Darryl Howell killed in a federal raid, according to independent pathologist Richard Siegler, M.D., of Santa Cruz, Calif., who performed a second autopsy on the body of the deceased at the request of attorneys retained by the family. Though not disproving the official finding of suicide, Siegler's report inspires a deeper questioning of the government's account of the fatal shooting that occurred during an October raid on Howell's Alpha-Omega Surplus and Supplies, located near Taft, California -- a small community 37 miles southwest of Bakersfield. In that scenario, Howell, 45, took his own life by shooting himself in the mouth with his own weapon to avoid being arrested on federal weapons law violations. As retold by those present at the scene, two agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms entered Howell's store about 10:15 a.m., Oct. 7, accompanied by senior deputy Robert Bendel of the Kern County Sheriff's Department and Taft police Sgt. Ed Whiting. Howell was to be charged with selling machine guns on two separate occasions, to an informant about two years ago. The ATF agents had federal search and arrest warrants. A large group of ATF agents and sheriff deputies waited outside. Those who planned the raid had decided against a "dynamic entry," and the arrest was to be "low-key," since Howell was recognized as being a non-violent person. Indeed, he made no effort to resist the officers' intrusion into his store, and stood quietly with his hands on his head while Whiting did a pat-down search for weapons. But when ATF agent Larry Williams attempted to handcuff him, Howell broke away and stepped into the narrow, crowded space behind a counter, government officials say. Williams tried unsuccessfully to stop him by wrapping his arms around him, but was no match for the much heavier Howell, who weighed over 300 pounds. Despite Williams hanging onto his back, Howell managed to grab one of his own guns, a loaded .45 caliber semi-automatic colt pistol he kept on a shelf, according to the official version. Williams said he realized what was happening and yelled "Don't do it! Don't do it!" But Howell, who assumed a crouching position, put the barrel in his mouth -- covering the gun with both hands -- and pulled the trigger. Whiting, fearing Williams had been shot, immediately pumped three rounds from his .40 caliber Glock semiautomatic pistol into Howell's back and right side. Carbon residue indicates one of the shots was a contact shot fired at extremely close range. The entire incident was over within minutes. The sheriff-coroner's office performed an autopsy. Forensic pathologist Donna Brown, M.D., found Howell's death to have been instantaneous and ruled it a "suicide." Brown reported the shots fired by Whiting occurred "post-mortem" (after death) -- hence the police officer was not responsible for the death. A two-member shooting review board, comprised solely of Taft Police Chief Bert Pumphrey and Taft police Lt. Ken McMinn exonerated Whiting, finding his shots to be "justifiable." That account of the tragedy has been adamantly rejected by Darryl Howell's family and friends. No one who knew him believes he would have committed suicide. His deeply held religious convictions would make that extremely unlikely. Howell, a devout Christian, believed suicide to be a sin. To probe deeper into the matter, Howell's family hired Faulkner and Faulkner, a Bakersfield legal firm specializing in what James Faulkner calls "government abuse cases." The first step in the investigation was to have a second autopsy performed. This took time, and the results were only recently sent to the attorneys. Kathleen Faulkner made a copy of the autopsy report available to WorldNetDaily. Dr. Siegler presented his findings with an important disclaimer: namely, that the first autopsy after death "sees the condition of the body most similar to what it looked like while alive." At a second autopsy, the pathologist must work with a body that has been dissected, tissues cut, and relations altered. Nonetheless, Siegler was able to determine that any of the bullets could have caused Howell's death. In a summary Siegler writes that the three bullets (fired by Whiting) were fired "at very close range into the right side and right back. ... The organs had been previously dissected during the first autopsy; however, based on the location of the external wounds, any of them would likely have been fatal as they disrupted vital chest organs, including the heart, lungs and aorta (a major artery). ... All three projectiles came to rest within the body, and there were no exit wounds of the chest." [ Continued In Next Message... ] - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: Further On Taft Shooting Date: 21 Jan 1999 20:44:00 -0700 [ ...Continued From Previous Message ] Describing the bullet from the gun reportedly fired by Howell, Siegler notes: "A single larger bullet entered the brain, fired through the back of the mouth. This wound also would have been fatal by itself. It's location is compatible with having been fired by the deceased. ... This projectile also came to rest within the skull. ... The overlying scalp, however, was not torn, and exerted sufficient elastic pressure to retain both the fractured portion of bone and the projectile." So, despite the bullet being a large .45 caliber, it stayed within Howell's head, a finding that confirmed that of the county's pathologist. "Each or any of these bullets would have caused death," Siegler concludes. "It is important to emphasize that, according to police reports, all shots were fired within a few seconds of each other. This information, together with the conclusion that death occurred immediately, indicate that no single bullet can be regarded as the one which produced death. There are no tissue changes I saw, grossly or histologically, which would indicate to the contrary. Bullets entering the chest producing entry wounds ... have a faint pink heat flash or track at their periphery. I interpret this to be due to direct heat effect of the skin which would have been independent of any action of the heart or necessity for blood pressure. For this reason, I believe that it is impossible to determine which single bullet caused death." "If that is so," Kathleen Faulkner observes, "how can we be sure Whiting didn't shoot first, killing him, then Darryl's gun was fired into his mouth to cover up a botched raid? We simply don't know. It's one of several possible scenarios." That, of course, is the question that's been on the minds of Howell's family and friends from the beginning. The new autopsy -- while not resolving the matter -- at least opens up possibilities. Other evidence has come to light that serves to call into question the official account. Sitting at her desk, Kathleen Faulkner ponders over a set of photos obtained from the county -- some taken at Howell's store in Taft, others from the coroner's office. So many questions arise -- all crying out for answers. Closeup of Howell's .45 caliber handgun as found beside body. No blood, no saliva, with safety on. There's the matter of the clean gun. According to the Kern County Regional Criminalistics Laboratory, the bullet fragments retrieved from Howell's brain came from a colt .45 Mark IV handgun, serial number B20661. This was found on the floor beside his body. [See photo 1] Instead of pointing down -- which might be expected if it had been dropped by the victim himself -- it faces towards his head. Even more significant, the gun -- which Howell had presumably held tight in both hands, then placed in his mouth as he pulled the trigger -- has absolutely no blood, saliva, and apparently no fingerprints on it. Swabs were taken of the muzzle and slide area of the gun. According to lab tests, "No saliva was detected on any of the swabs received for examination." And "although a very small amount of cellular-like material was microscopically present on the swabs ... this material did not give a positive human response." "I don't see how this is possible," remarks Kathleen Faulkner. "How could the gun be so clean, unless it was wiped down?" Sgt. Glenn Johnson of the Kern County Sheriff's Dept. explained that this is not extraordinary. "It happens," he later told WorldNetDaily. "Depending on the incident, sometimes we do, sometimes we don't have blood on the weapon," he said. "It depends a lot on the gun itself as far as how tight the gun is held when it's discharged. The tighter the gun is held and forced up against the point of contact, you'll have a bit more blowback [of blood] than you will if the gun is not held real tight." This response is not likely to satisfy critics. Especially, when -- as Kathleen Faulkner points out -- there's not only a lack of blood and saliva, but the safety catch is on, as can be seen in the photo. But the condition of the gun isn't the only problem the Faulkner's find with the official account. "What about this wound over Darryl's eye," Kathleen Faulkner asks, studying another photo, this one from the county's autopsy. Head injury suggests blow to head Howell's head, shaved, shows a head injury of some kind. "Did someone hit him during a struggle?" she wonders. "It looks like it could be from a gun butt. Or perhaps it happened when he fell. Whatever it was, it certainly looks like it was inflicted externally, and we'd like to know what caused it." More photos. "Here, look at these." she says, then challenges, "Do you see anything funny about these pictures?" Death scene, with Howell's body as it fell In the first, Howell is shown lying on the floor in front of his desk -- there's a space between the desk and a small safe. In the next shot the safe has been pushed up against the desk. "Someone's moved furniture," she points out. "They're not supposed to do that. So the question is, why did they? Who did it? How much more furniture was moved about like this?" Asked about the apparent furniture moving, Sgt. Johnson told WorldNetDaily he'd have to review the photos, but "everything in them would be as it was when the investigators got there. We'd search for expended rounds and casings, but as far as the photographs showing the body still there, nothing was moved." Johnson said that the search for spent casings would not be conducted until after the body was removed. "It'll take a long time to get to the bottom of this case," Kathleen Faulkner says. "We're waiting to hear back on some tests. We've found definite holes in the official account, some things just don't make any sense -- these are just a few of them -- we have to sort everything out and put it together." - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: HOW THE BRITS LOST THEIR HANDGUNS Date: 21 Jan 1999 20:44:00 -0700 Forwarded from leslemke@gte.net The only thing that I disagree with as far as this article is concerned is in reference to the NRA and the assumption being that the NRA is FOR our 2nd Amendment rights. I'm a member of Gunowners Of America. In my opinion, the NRA is NOT militant enough in standing up for our 2nd Amendment RIGHT! Les Guns & Ammo 1999 HANDGUNS ANNUAL Pages 80-1 HOW THE BRITS LOST THEIR HANDGUNS By Brian McCombie If you want to see how people can lose their firearms and their freedoms, look no further than England. Ironically, the nation that gave us so many of our ideas about liberty and personal rights has set the pattern for outlawing the handgun, and American anti-gun forces have learned the lessons of their British counterparts well. British handgun owners received the first blow in September 1997, when centerfire handguns were declared illegal. The second shoe dropped in February 1998, when rimfire handguns were outlawed. The penalty for possession of either? Ten years imprisonment and/or a hefty fine. The demise of the British pistol owner began in Dunblane, Scotland, in March 1996, when a lunatic armed with four pistols massacred 16 school children and their teacher. The nation was in shock -- except for the anti-gun segment, which saw a way to benefit from this terrible tragedy. At the forefront was one Mrs. Anne Pearston, whose "Snowdrop Appeal" campaign gathered a million signatures against pistol ownership. Anti-gun politicians quickly pushed for a ban on centerfires, and even pro-gun polls bowed to perceived public pressure. Once centerfires were history, the politicians began drafting anti-rimfire laws. Shortly before the first handgun ban took effect, I began an interesting correspondence with one Mr. Russ Orchard of Essex, England. A loyal reader of Guns & Ammo, Orchard had read an essay of mine, "European Gun Laws: A History of Distrust," in the June 1997 issue. He contacted me, and we began writing each other. Early on, I inquired about the reaction of British pistol owners right after Dunblane. From one of Orchard's lefters: "During this time, the various shooting organizations requested shooters to remain silent, take a low profile and not respond to the media insults out of respect for the dead children [of Dunblane]. This we did willingly, enduring labels like `perverts,' `lunatics,' etc., from press and politicians alike. "By the time we woke up and got our asses in gear, the Snowdrop Appeal was unstoppable." Here, the essential anti-gun pattern took shape. First, the act of a madman was used to define all gun owners, even though the vast majority were law-abiding citizens. Meanwhile, anti-gun politicians and the press whipped up emotions, even calling handgun owners "perverts" and "lunatics." Finally, radical legislation was passed. It doesn't seem, though, that the pols and the press truly explained what they were up to. As Orchard notes, polls showed most Brits believed the anti-centerfire law was aimed at criminals. But of course it wasn't are criminals turning in their pistols at the end of 1997. It was honest people like Russ Orchard. Surrendering his five pistols was especially difficult for Mr. Orchard, a dedicated competition shooter for the last 14 years. From a letter of his dated December 14, 1997: "I handed in all my pistols today, a very sad parting. My main competition [pistol] was a custom-built .38 on a Model 66 frame, with bull barrel, Wichita sight rib and the best action you ever felt. Together we collected 67 trophies, so you can imagine it was quite a wrench knowing it was going into the furnace." Any of this sound familiar? When two boys allegedly killed four classmates and one teacher in Jonesboro, Arkansas, in March 1998, the anti-gun press jumped on the bandwagon again. Article after article blamed guns and hunting for the incident outright or at least suggested they were significant causes. Meanwhile -- big coincidence -- Clinton and the anti-gunners began pushing for a national background check on all firearm purchases. Certainly not as bad as what happened to the Brits, but one more restriction, one more hurdle to firearm ownership. Yet, as happened with the Dunblane tragedy, few people asked the tougher questions, including, "Why did these people hold human life in such contempt?" Speaking of contempt, there's another interesting parallel to the situation here and in England. In both cases, anti-gun forces show complete disdain for an individual's right to personal protection. When our correspondence began, I was surprised at Orchard's many references to English crime. From his first letter: "Our country is now awash with illegal guns smuggled in from the former Eastern Bloc, and shootings are almost a daily event in some parts of the UK. There seems very little that can be done about this, even if someone could be found willing to do it." Rampant crime in merry old England, the home of the unarmed Bobby? But after reading photocopies provided by Orchard and doing my own research, it turns out England is fighting a wave of drugs, gangs and illegal weapons. The gangs include the Russian Mafia, Yardies (Jamaican gangsters) and homegrown hoods. In places like Liverpool, gang drug wars are common. Asked if it's true that someone can hire a gunman by the day, Liverpool's Detective Chief Inspector Alan Buckley replied, "That is what our intelligence suggests." And in the midst of all this, England's politicians forced their law-abiding citizens to gather up their handguns and toss them into the smelting furnace. Yes, you can own certain rifles and shotguns in England today, but none that are semi-automatic. These were banned in 1987. And you must first receive a license, after a lengthy application process that includes a background check and a home inspection. You also have to purchase an approved firearms safe. Want a second firearm? Repeat the whole process. But even if you live in a crime-ridden area of England, don't put down "Protection of Home" as the reason you're applying for a firearm. To the police, personal protection's not a valid justification, and your application will be denied. This reminds me of a situation that happened in this country about a decade ago. The syndicated columnist Carl Rowan wrote many times about his opposition to the Second Amendment, calling for a national ban on firearms for every one except law-enforcement personnel. Yet in 1988 Rowan shot a man trying to enter his house. Much was made of the fact that Rowan used an unregistered pistol on his assailant. More important, I think, was what Rowan's actions revealed about himself. When he felt his and his wife's lives threatened, the anti-gun Rowan used his Second Amendment rights to protect himself. But pass Rowan's national law, and how many of us would have the same ability? Of course, it's just our personal protection at stake. It's not like we're important syndicated writers, now is it? Fortunately, American gun owners have several advantages over our British cousins. They include a Second Amendment that clearly states our right to keep and bear arms, and a long history of individual firearms ownership. Equally important, we have groups like the National Rifle Association fighting to keep our Second Amendment rights intact. Yet there are very powerful interests actively working to gut the Second Amendment. Looking back on the disastrous British experience, Mr. Orchard provides some sage advice for us: "I do hope that American shooters are taking this all on board, because if it can happen here, it can happen anywhere. It would seem that one all-governing shooting body with ample funds would possibly have defeated this [anti-pistol campaign, but this we did not have. You really must build up the NRA reserves again... Guard your guns, fishing, hunting, freedom and most of all your backs." Amen. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: Teaching Tolerance Date: 21 Jan 1999 20:44:00 -0700 WESTMINSTER C O L L E G E American Express, The Associated Students of Westminster College, and The Bill and Vieve Gore School of Business present Morris Dees Chairman and Founder, The Southern Poverty Law Center Teaching Tolerance Despite threats against his life, Morris Dees continues to lead the crusade against hate in America, arguing cases on behalf of hate crime victims. In the 1980s he bankrupted the KKK, winning a series of historic lawsuits. Today he focuses his attention on anti-government militias. Dees will explore the dangers of some of the United States' most radical militia groups and will discuss the potential for an epidemic of racial violence and unrest if people don't start healing the wounds of racial hatred. A feature of the WELDON J. TAYLOR EXECUTIVE LECTURE SERIES for 1999 7:30 P.M., Wednesday, February 10, 1999 at the auditorium of the Bill and Vieve Gore School of Business Westminster College campus 1840 South 1300 East Salt Lake City, Utah 84105 Open to the public at no charge - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: Re: WAG THAT DOG! Date: 22 Jan 1999 09:38:41 -0700 Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Thu, 21 Jan 1999 23:18:53 -0700 Received: from fs1.mainstream.net by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id XAA01654; Thu, 21 Jan 1999 23:04:12 -0700 Received: from (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with SMTP id BAA27228; Fri, 22 Jan 1999 01:15:58 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990121224033.008edc30@texoma.net> Errors-To: listproc@mainstream.net Reply-To: joesylvester@texoma.net Originator: noban@mainstream.net Sender: noban@mainstream.net Precedence: first-class X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline At 11:16 PM 1/21/99 -0500, Kevin McGehee wrote: >Screaming banner, with accompanying verbiage, now showing on the front page at >The Drudge Report: > >=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > >CLINTON WARNS OF DANGER OF TERRORIST ATTACKS! > >President Clinton said Thursday that it was "highly likely" that a = terrorist >group would launch a germ or chemical attack on American soil within the = next >few years: "I just want the American people to know what they need to = know and >have a realistic view of this," the president said in a 45-minute interview in >the Oval Office, "not to be afraid, or asleep. I think that's the trick." >Clinton tells the NEW YORK TIMES that "he is carefully weighing a = proposal from >the Defense Department to establish for the first time a commander in chief for >homeland defense of the continental United States." The paper reports = that Balderdash, Clinton lies again. There have been Contential Defense = commands of various sort for..well for a long time. There may not have been a CinC in the way that SouthCom has a CinC or CentCom has a CinC, because that's actually a realtively new organizational model. But Contential Defense there has been, what does Clinton think all those Nike (and I don't mean the sneaker) sites were for? No to mention the Texas Tower radar sites, and so forth. Of course what he means is not defense *of* the contential US, but rather military activity *within* the continental U.S. . I think it's been at least 80 years since anything other than training has gone on in the Contential US, dicounting a few German sabatours, and not counting anti-submarine warfare conducted off the east coast, often within site of the coast. Before that (Which as Pancho Villa in New Mexico BTW), you = have to go back to the Indian wars, which is likely a better model for what the Impeached One has in mind, with gun owners, and anyone to his right, playing the part of the Indians. Perhaps he should get Hillary to talk to the ghost of one George Armstong Custer, to find out what happens when one attacks an armed group, while outnumbered by a couple of orders of = magnitude. >Clinton smiled repeatedly, yet spoke of spending sleepless nights pondering the >new security challenges facing America after the end of the Cold War... > >=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > >Kevin McGehee >Fairbanks/North Pole, AK >mcgehee@mosquitonet.com >http://www.mosquitonet.com/~mcgehee/ > >Larry Flynt is the perfect moral voice for the Clinton Administration > > > > Dennis J. Sylvester Captain USAFR(ret) - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "S. Thompson" Subject: NEWS - USA gun lawsuits Date: 22 Jan 1999 15:17:15 -0700 Editorials Oppose City Gun Lawsuits (Join Together Online) 1/20/99 Two big-city newspapers -- the Boston Globe and the Spokane Spokesman-Review -- have published editorials opposing city lawsuits against the gun industry that seek reimbursement for costs related to gun violence. The Globe -- which has reported extensively on gun-control issues -- called the lawsuits "a mistake" in its Jan. 19 editorial, saying, "This newspaper is firmly in favor of strict gun control and keeping guns off the street. Yet using the courts in this way abuses the legal system and derogates the legislative process." The Globe noted that unlike tobacco, guns don't harm users if used "in the way it is supposed to by law and design." If guns are misused, parents and police should respond, the editorial said; if gun distribution is too lax, it is up to the legislature to change things, not the courts. "Suing the gun manufacturers to get guns off the street is bad law and bad policy," the Globe concluded. The Spokane Spokesman-Review was even harsher in its assessment, calling the lawsuits "a cynical grab for undeserved money." "This attempt to injure an industry producing a legal product is constitutionally dangerous," the paper's editorial board wrote on Jan. 8. "The tobacco settlement showed revenue-hungry officials how to tap industry to fund their social programs," according to the Spokesman-Review. "Now, the gun industry is in the crosshairs. Automobile makers are sure to follow. Why blame drunken drivers for maiming and killing when those who make their vehicles have deeper pockets? The fast food industry, with its artery-clogging menus, should worry, too. As should we all, when abusive lawsuits take aim at freedom." ----End Forwarded Message(s)---- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "S. Thompson" Subject: URGENT ALERT! FEE INCREASES! HB 237 Date: 24 Jan 1999 14:41:45 -0700 HB. 237, Department of Public Safety Fee Consolidation, sponsored by Rep. Blake Chard, will be heard in committee TOMORROW, Monday, Jan. 25. It will be heard by the House Criminal Law and Justice Committee, at 8 AM, Rm. 225, State Capitol. This bill operates on the theory that if you can't ban concealed carry, you can make it too expensive for most people to afford. This is especially unfair since low-income folks, who tend to live in the areas with highest crime, need to be able to defend themselves. The bill would increase firearms-related fees across the board: The application fee would increase from $35 to $50. (43%) The renewal fee would increase from $5 to $25. (500%) There is currently no fee for replacement of a permit; the new fee would be $15. There is currently no late fee for renewal; the proposed late fee is $7.50. The fee for a background check would increase from $7.50 to $15. (100%) More insidious, this bill would allow the Department of Public Safety to raise fees in the future without legislative oversight. (See the frequent references to Sec. 63-38-3.2). The Utah Constitution states that we have the RIGHT to keep and bear arms. (Yes, I know that right has already been violated by the permit system!) Rights are not contingent on having enough money to pay for them, nor may they be denied to the poor. DPS in general runs a responsive and user-friendly department. It is possible that they need some additional funds to continue to provide services, although in most cases, costs go DOWN as volume increases. However, I can find no justification for fee increases that range from 43% to 500%. No private industry could get away with doubling its fees overnight. In view of DPS's support for such extreme fee increases, oversight should remain under the oversight of the legislature. Please let legislators know that these fee increases are completely unreasonable, and that you would like the legislature to retain oversight of DPS's fees. If you can attend the committee meeting tomorrow, please do so. Please contact the following members of the Committee and urge them to OPPOSE HB 237. Remember to keep messages short, to the point, and polite. Rep. DeMar "Bud" Bowman, Chair, dbowman@le.state.ut.us Rep. Jack A. Seitz, Vice Chair, jseitz@le.state.ut.us Rep. Trisha Beck, law@silversage.com Rep. Duane Bourdeaux, dbourdea@le.state.ut.us Rep. Perry L. Buckner, pbuckner@aol.com Rep. Blake D. Chard, bchard@utah-connections.com Rep. David L. Hogue, dhogue@le.state.ut.us Rep. Susan J. Koehn, skoehn@le.state.ut.us Rep. Loraine T. Pace, lpace@le.state.ut.us Rep. Carl R. Saunders, csaunder@le.state.ut.us Rep. Nora B. Stephens, nstephen@le.state.ut.us If you would like to mail all of them at once, you can paste the following into the "To:" section of your e-mail: nstephen@le.state.ut.us,jseitz@le.state.ut.us, csaunder@le.state.ut.us, lpace@le.state.ut.us, skoehn@le.state.ut.us, dhogue@le.state.ut.us, bchard@utah-connections.comp, buckner@aol.com, dbowman@le.state.ut.us, dbourdea@le.state.ut.us, law@silversage.com If you are up early, you can also call and leave messages for any Representative at: 801-538-1029 or 800-662-3367. Copies of this bill in various formats, as well as committee information, can be found at: http://www.le.state.ut.us/~1999/htmdoc/hbillhtm/HB0237.htm Please help STOP FEE INCREASES!! Thanks for your support! Sarah leg-alerts is owned and distributed by Sarah Thompson, M.D. The opinions in this alert represent those of the list owner only, unless otherwise attributed or specified. To subscribe to leg-alerts send a message to: majordomo@aros.net in the body of the message put: subscribe leg-alerts PLEASE REMEMBER THAT YOU CANNOT POST TO THIS LIST! Send comments, alerts, suggestions, etc. to: righter@therighter.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "S. Thompson" Subject: ALERT: SB 91 Date: 24 Jan 1999 15:11:09 -0700 Re: SB 91 - Weapons Technical Amendments - Sen. Mike Waddoups SB 91 is a bill introduced by Sen. Mike Waddoups which clarifies the language of the state pre-emption law. As introduced, SB 91 moves the pre-emption language from "definitions" to "Uniform Law". This is a legislative "housekeeping" bill that, as introduced, does not change the law. However, as suggested by many persons (including this writer), an attempt was made to amend the bill to add that "no person shall be required to have a license or permit to SELL or TRANSFER a weapon". This additional language is necessary to prevent municipalities from prohibiting individuals or businesses from selling or transferring firearms. It would also prevent municipalities from requiring gun shows to have permits, which they could then use to deny such permits and shut down gun shows. It was also suggested that the state pre-emption law specifically mention state agencies, boards, divisions and departments, so that the law will conform to the opinion of the legislative general counsel that agencies such as the state government and the University of Utah may not ban firearms. This bill was heard in committee on Friday, Jan. 22 and was reported out favorably. I received the following report from Elwood Powell, Chair of USSC, who attended the committee meeting: "Ladies and Gentlemen: I appeared at the hearing on S.B.91 this morning. I put into the record the language changes suggested by Shirley Spain and Scott Engen. The committee voted the bill out, and were going to check with legislative counsel to determine whether the suggested changes qualified as technical amendments. If they do they will be added on the Senate Floor. It may be that a substitute bill will need to be introduced and referred to committee to get the changes made. I will keep you advised. All of the committee members that specific references to state agencies, boards, divisions and departments was a great idea. Especially, after they were reminded of Legislative Counsel's legal memorandum produced for the last session. Woody" As noted, it is not yet clear whether these changes can be incorporated into the bill on the House floor, or whether a substitute bill will be required. Although no urgent action is necessary at this time, please let your own representative know that you would like him/her to SUPPORT SB 91 AS AMENDED. If you don't know who your representative is, please go to: http://www.le.state.ut.us/house/house.htm The original bill text and committee report can be found at: http://www.le.state.ut.us/~1999/htmdoc/sbillhtm/SB0091.htm Thanks! Sarah leg-alerts is owned and distributed by Sarah Thompson, M.D. The opinions in this alert represent those of the list owner only, unless otherwise attributed or specified. To subscribe to leg-alerts send a message to: majordomo@aros.net in the body of the message put: subscribe leg-alerts PLEASE REMEMBER THAT YOU CANNOT POST TO THIS LIST! Send comments, alerts, suggestions, etc. to: righter@therighter.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "S. Thompson" Subject: ALERT: Asset Forfeiture Date: 24 Jan 1999 16:00:29 -0700 I hope that all of you are aware of the problems caused by asset forfeiture, a legal "doctrine" that allows government to seize the property of an innocent person, charge the PROPERTY with a crime, convict the PROPERTY, and then keep it. Although originally intended to allow for the seizure of contraband, such as illegal drugs, asset forfeiture laws have been used to seize real estate, motor vehicles, boats, airplanes, cash, bank accounts, and virtually every other form of property. Firearms are frequent targets of asset forfeiture laws, since such laws allow for your firearms to be seized without the troublesome necessity of proving that you committed a crime. Any firearm found "in the vicinity" is assumed to have been used to facilitate the crime, and in thus "guilty". Assets can be seized with no "proof" required other than the word of an anonymous paid informant (who often gets a share of the seized assets!). Such laws violate the Fourth Amendment, as well as both common sense and common decency. A bill will be introduced in the legislature this year to end such abuses. The bill is still being drafted, so I haven't seen it. My understanding is that it would allow for assets to be forfeited only when there is a criminal conviction of the owner of the assets or that it would require that the owner be accorded due process. Much of the public, and far too many legislators, are still in the dark about asset forfeiture. Therefore, your assistance is needed NOW to help educate both the public and the legislators. Please contact your legislators (both House and Senate), explain the problems associated with asset forfeiture, and ask them to help end the abuses. Perhaps even more important, please write letters to your local newspapers, and educate your friends, family and co-workers. Daniel Newby, of the Sutherland Institute, has asked me to distribute the following article on Asset Forfeiture, which is being distributed by the Institute. Since the author is someone I know and respect , I agreed. Please feel free to distribute this note and/or the article to whomever you please. Other information on asset forfeiture can be found at: http://www.fear.org (esp. Law Library, Legislation and Lobbying, and Public Opinon) http://www.therighter.com/articles (Click on Justice Throught the Looking Glass - Asset Forfeiture, on the left) The Sutherland Institute article follows: >*************************************************************** >* ##### #### ##### # # #### #### #### ### # # ##### * >* # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # * >* # # # # #### ### #### # # # # ### # * >* # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # * >* # #### # # # #### # #### ### # # # * >*************************************************************** >TO THE POINT: A Sutherland Institute Public Policy Perspective >May 18, 1998 > > >*The Ignoble History of Asset Forfeiture:* >Where Do We Go From Here? > >By Sarah Thompson, M.D. > >Asset forfeiture is the seizure by government, without due process or >compensation, of private property alleged to have been involved with, or >tainted by, illegal activities. The innocence or guilt of the property >owner is irrelevant to the seizure of his property. Originally adopted as >a deterrent to foreign criminals, it is now a threat to all Americans who >own property. > >The history of forfeiture in the United States is, for the most part, >ignoble. The original forfeiture laws, the only constitutional ones,were >directed against piracy and allowed for the seizure of pirate ships. Since >the owners of the pirate ships were on the other side of the Atlantic and >outside the reach of American law, forfeiture of the ships was deemed >necessary to discourage piracy. American citizens had nothing to fear from >these laws. > >Forfeiture, prohibited by the Bill of Rights, did not adversely affect >American residents until the nineteenth century. In 1825, the Black Codes >adopted by Florida allowed for white persons to search the property of >non-whites and confiscate weapons without warrant, due process, or >compensation. During the Civil War the issue arose again. Numerous legal >scholars warned against succumbing to the temptation of applying forfeiture >for reasons of expediency. But the pressures of war were too great, and >Confederate soldiers and sympathizers were subject to forfeiture of their >property. > >Although the Supreme Court later acted to correct some of these excesses, a >dangerous precedent was set. Peacetime forfeiture was prohibited, but >government retained the power to conduct forfeitures during wartime. For >this reason it is not surprising that attempts at drug interdiction are >referred to as a "War on Drugs." > >Nonetheless, asset forfeiture remained legally unconstitutional until the >Constitution was amended in 1919 to prohibit alcohol. Based on this >amendment, the Supreme Court ruled that a vehicle used for transporting >alcohol was guilty of a crime and could be forfeited. > >Prohibition was later repealed, but the idea of forfeiture was eagerly >adopted by all levels of government, and the War on Drugs was used to >justify a new wave of forfeiture laws. These laws were expanded to permit >forfeiture for virtually all crimes. Similarly, the definition of property >"involved" in a crime was expanded to include all property, even if it had >no apparent relationship to a crime. > >The 1970 Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) provided >the first provisions for criminal, as opposed to civil, forfeiture in the >United States. Although it is promoted as a tool to stop organized crime, >in reality, all drug crimes and virtually all federal crimes can be >prosecuted under RICO. For example, under the currently pending Senate >Bill 10, a firearms manufacturer's entire business can be seized and >forfeited under RICO if a single firearm manufactured by that company is >used to commit a crime. > >What does the average citizen have to fear from asset forfeiture? A great >deal. Under our current laws, private property can be seized even if the >owner of the property did not participate in, or even know about, the >alleged illegal activity for which the property is being forfeited. >Contrary to popular belief, up to 80 percent of forfeitures target innocent >people who are never charged with a crime, much less convicted of one. > >The courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, have not acted to stop >forfeiture abuses. Law enforcement agencies usually get to keep most of >the proceeds of forfeiture, so they have a strong incentive to utilize >forfeiture as often as possible. This incentive may be strong enough to >pre-empt more traditional law enforcement activities such as preventing >crimes and apprehending criminals, a problem of particular concern to >people who depend on the police for protection. > >One possible solution, which was used successfully in Missouri, is to >remove the incentive for law enforcement agencies to engage in forfeiture >by prohibiting them from profiting from such activities. Separating >forfeiture from profit might help to ensure that it is used as a weapon >against serious criminals instead of as a fundraising mechanism. > >One thing is clear: taking property from innocent people for any purpose, >no matter how noble, is still stealing, and still wrong. The public needs >to let law enforcement agencies and legislators know that it considers >such practices unacceptable. Some legislators are already aware of the >problem. Rep. Henry Hyde's manager's amendment to HR 1965, "The Civil >Asset Forfeiture Reform Act," would help to decrease asset forfeiture abuses. > >The ultimate goal should be to abolish the archaic concept that inanimate >objects can commit crimes and may legally be seized for doing so. > >######### > >Sarah Thompson is a medical doctor and policy specialist who authored this >piece for the Sutherland Institute, a Utah public policy research >institute. Permission to reprint this article in whole or in part is >granted provided credit is given to the author and to the Sutherland >Institute. > >For more information about the Sutherland Institute and/or to order >additional copies of this article, call the Institute office, 801-281-2081, >or write: The Sutherland Institute, 111 E. 5600 South, Suite 208, Murray, >UT 84107. Fax 801-281-2414, e-mail: sutherland@utah-inter.net. Nothing >written here is to be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of the >Sutherland Institute, as an attempt to aid or hinder the passage of any >legislation, or as an endorsement of any candidate or initiative. > >- >********************************************************** >Daniel B. Newby >Director of Project Development & Member Relations >dnewby@utah-inter.net > >The Sutherland Institute: Shaping the Future of Utah >Independence Square >111 East 5600 South, Suite 208 >Murray, Utah 84107 >Phone: (801) 281-2081 >Fax: (801) 281-2414 >********************************************************** - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: Australians nix surrender Date: 24 Jan 1999 21:52:00 -0700 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From the Cybershooters list. I say congratulations to the citizens of Austrailia in their saying "up yours" to their government. :-) Mike P Queensland "The Sunday Mail" Buyback blamed for illegal trade By CHRIS GRIFITH 24jan99 THE $500 million national gun buy-back scheme has failed, Queensland's foremost police weapons expert says. Inspector John McCoomb says gun laws introduced after the 1996 Port Arthur massacre have sent the trade underground. "Once they're on the black market, they're there for anyone to buy," he said. He said that "with the right contacts", it was still possible to buy semi-automatic weapons like the Armalite (AR-10) rifle Martin Bryant used in the massacre. Inspector McCoomb, who heads the Weapons Licensing Branch, said Australians had handed in only a fraction of the weapons in the community. So far, just over 643,000 guns had been surrendered nationally, about 131,000 of them in Queensland. It was impossible to calculate the number of guns in Australia but 643,000 was a fraction of just two brands of now-illegal guns in the country. "About 800,000 (semi-automatic and automatic) SKK and SKS weapons came in from China back in the 1980s as part of a trade deal between the Australian and Chinese governments," Insp McCoomb said. "And it was estimated that there were 1.2 million semi-automatic Ruger 1022s in the country. "That's about 2 million firearms of just two types in the country." Insp McCoomb said police realised there were abundant illegal firearms for people to commit public atrocities. On November 1 last year, gang members fired a hail of bullets at a Sydney police station using high-powered 9mm automatics or semi-automatics. Five police were inside. This barrage of shots in a city street was exactly the sort of scenario the buy-back was supposed to stop. Insp McCoomb said firearms activity has increased despite the buy-back, particularly in Sydney. "There firearms are in the hands of gangs, organised crime syndicates, the druggies, the bikies, the whole box and dice." He said he had estimated about half of guns in Queensland were now illegally held. "We did a 'guestimate' before all this started and we conservatively estimated between 1.2 and 1.3 million guns in Queensland. "We've now got about 520,000 guns licensed. Even when you take into account 130,000 guns handed in, we're well and truly short." Insp McCoomb estimated that only 25 per cent of those with guns were now licensed. Owners had opted to go outside the system. Even newly licensed owners had not declared their full arsenal. "When we have checked after an incident, we've found they've got five guns registered to their licence, when they actually have 10. "The perception in the shooting community is that 'if you know all about my guns, you'll soon take them all off me'." Insp McCoomb criticised courts which had not revoked licences of dealers who traded on the black market. "In one case, a dealer sold a firearm to an undercover agent and was prosecuted. But the magistrate ruled that it was no offence because the undercover agent was a police officer who was exempt from the provisions of the Act." An appeal had been lodged in the District Court. Crimes involving guns had soared during and since the buyback, Insp McCoomb said. In 1997, the year the buy-back was completed, robberies involving guns leapt 39 per cent, and assaults involving guns 28 per cent. Australian Customs acknowledges only a fraction of containers entering the country are searched for illegal weapons. Customs spokesman Leon Bedington said one inspector would need eight days to check a container load thoroughly. "Nobody here likes Sara Lee!" -- www.wagc.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "S. Thompson" Subject: FWD: First Gun Rights Victory Date: 26 Jan 1999 00:01:27 -0700 Following is a note I received today from Shirley Spain. The message spe= aks for itself. I would add only two things - This is a victory not only for gun rights a= ctivists, but for everyone who believes that all people are equal under t= he law, that laws apply to all citizens, and that there should not be "sp= ecial" categories of people with "special privileges". Second, this emphasizes that individual citizens who are informed, concer= ned, and take the time to communicate with legislators really can make a = difference. So don't despair - we CAN do it! Sarah The remainder of this message was written by Shirley Spain or Scott Engen= , as noted. Also, Shirley's e-mail address is agr@aros.net. FIRST GUN RIGHTS VICTORY Utah's gun rights activists got their first victory today (interestingly, no thanks to any gun lobby). Scott Engen, former lobbyist for the Utah Shooting Sports Council drafted an incredibly powerful and convincing piece on the dangers of HB26 - Retired Police Officer Weapons Exemptions and why it should be opposed. (Copy of Scott's position is within this email.) Then he emailed it to th= e bill's sponsor, Rebecca Lockhart. Scott's piece so educated Rep. Lockhart that she agreed to hold the bill = in committee, which effectively "kills" the bill for the session. (Copy of Rep. Lockhart's response to Scott also follows.) WAY TO GO SCOTT!!! Now Scott needs YOUR help. We need to let Rep. Lockhart know that we appreciate her wisdom in holding the bill. PLEASE email a thank-you to her, address: blockhar@le.state.utah.us ABOUT THIS ALERT As many of you know, I, (Shirley Spain) have resigned my position with th= e publication of American Gun Review in September of '97. I also resigned = as Vice Chair of the Utah Shooting Sports Council this summer. I am no longe= r affiliated with any organization. Thus, you are receiving this (and future) gun rights alerts from me as a private citizen; a fellow pro-gunn= er active in the political process. If you do not want to receive gun rights updates, or if you know someone who would like to be added to my list, please advise me. Until next time... As always, yours in freedom, Shirley A. Spain SCOTT ENGEN'S POSITION PAPER ON HB26 HB 26 Retired Police Officer Weapons Exemptions Sponsor: R. Lockhart Position: Strong Opposition Overview: This bill eliminates the requirement for a retired peace office= r to apply for and be granted a Utah Concealed Firearms permit in order to car= ry a concealed firearm, and exempts them from the Brady Background Check when purchasing a firearm from a licensed dealer. There are several glaring flaws with the concept and execution of this legislative proposal. Foremost among them is that the bill creates the co= ncept that a retired police officer is a member of some special or protected cl= ass of individuals within our society. A law enforcement officer, while they = are employed by a law enforcement agency, is a public employee, vested with specific law enforcement authority and the power of arrest, as limited by their agency and POST certification status. Once that individual leaves s= worn service through separation, termination or retirement, they become a priv= ate citizen, with no more special privileges or authority in use of force tha= n any other private citizen. While many if not most active and retired law enforcement officers are exemplary citizens, a percentage are not. Occasions of individual miscond= uct do arise in which the officer is offered retirement instead of terminatio= n by his or her employing agency, in order preserve the officer=92s retirement benefits and pension, and avoid adverse or damaging publicity for the employing agency and law enforcement as a whole. An officer separated und= er these circumstances may have been a party to unlawful violence or brutali= ty, ethical or moral lapses or otherwise egregious behavior, yet would have t= he ability to purchase or carry a concealed firearm without restriction, and without any background check whatsoever. Further, by eliminating the requirement for a periodic review as a part o= f a Concealed Firearm Permit renewal, there is no mechanism by which the ongo= ing behavior or conduct of the officer may be monitored. A retired officer ma= y become involved in criminal activity, threaten or use unlawful violence, become a danger to themselves or others, be adjudicated mentally incompet= ent, engage on acts of substance abuse, moral turpitude or be subject to court orders related to domestic violence. By providing a lifetime exemption to these ongoing checks and balances, a situation which may endanger the pub= lic or the individual in question. The same concerns apply to compliance with= the Brady Act's background check for purchase of a firearm. Finally, many senior law enforcement officials, particularly political appointees, were the most antagonistic and vocal group in opposition of r= eform and liberalized concealed carry laws and most supportive of intrusive Bra= dy background checks on law-abiding firearms purchasers. It is clearly hypocritical for those who so vocally supported such measur= es as a part of their official duties would seek to exempt themselves from thes= e requirements once they again become private citizens. What's good for the goose is good for the retired officer as well. It is suggested that, rather than the current language of HB 26, legislat= ion be adopted to allow a retiring law enforcement officer to be granted an exemption from the background check, training requirement and associated application fees for a standard civilian Utah Concealed Firearms permit. = To qualify for this one-time exemption, the officer must apply within 30 day= s of their retirement from full-time sworn duty, and supply to the issuing sta= te agency, by way of written certification from their former employing law enforcement agency, that they have no criminal record, history of substan= ce abuse, moral or ethical lapses, or other disqualifying behavior, and they= are familiar with the Utah laws regarding use of force by a private citizen a= nd the safe use of a firearm. This secures the retiring officer a carry perm= it at no out of pocket cost to the officer. Costs may be covered by the employi= ng agency or absorbed by the issuing agency. The initial permit is valid for= 5 years, with a renewal fee currently set at $5.00 every five years. Assuming an officer joins an agency at age 25, serves for 20 years until retirement at age 45, and is issued at retirement a Utah Concealed Firear= ms permit valid for 5 years until their death at age 75, the total costs of permit renewals during his or her lifetime would not exceed $20.00, a cos= t well within the budget of most individuals, including the average retired= law enforcement officer. In conclusion, while the sponsors' intent is no doubt sincere, the concep= t and execution are deeply flawed. Police officers are by and large good and de= cent individuals, but as retired private citizens they have no more rights or privileges that any other tax-paying private citizen, who paid their sala= ry, supports their pension and benefits, and whom they once swore an oath to protect. Thank you. REP. LOCKHART'S RESPONSE Scott, Thank you for your concerns. First of all, let me tell you that the idea for this bill is in no way se= rved by the drafted legislation. The bill does not do what was the intended, = for the exact reasons you mentioned. I have asked that the bill be kept in committee, hopefully to never again see the light of day. I appreciate your concerns as they were the same ones I had. Let me state again, this bill would do things I am vehemently opposed to. This was not the intent. Therefore, I have requested that it not be brou= ght out of committee. If you have any questions about where this bill idea = came from, please feel free to contact me or Rep. David Ure. Thanks for your input. Rep. R. Lockhart leg-alerts is owned and distributed by Sarah Thompson, M.D. The opinions in this alert represent those of the list owner only,=20 unless otherwise attributed or specified. To subscribe to leg-alerts send a message to: majordomo@aros.net in the body of the message put: subscribe leg-alerts PLEASE REMEMBER THAT YOU CANNOT POST TO THIS LIST! Send comments, alerts, suggestions, etc. to: righter@therighter.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: FW:Steve Sady's DN letter Date: 28 Jan 1999 21:35:00 -0700 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Cc: Steve Sady Steve Sady just sent the following to the DesNews. Well done, Steve! ---------- Your Jan 18 editorial trivializes constitutional civil rights. The second amendment is not merely a 'CONSIDERATION' for legislators and bureaucrats like Utah's Dave Jones when they decide the law-abiding masses of citizens are blundering fools, incapable of exercising their constitutional right to keep and bear arms. Some elitists in the legislature and on your editorial board don't trust the average citizen with rights secured to us by the Constitution. Tough. It's not a negotiable point! Hitler's Nazis first registered guns, later confiscated them; the aftermath is well known. No American worthy of the freedom bought by patriots' blood will consent to registration or prohibition of personal arms. The US Constitution's second amendment and Utah's constitution FORBIDS the prohibition or regulation of adult citizens' guns. This Constitution is the oxygen of our freedom and the Second Amendment is our 'Canary in the mine shaft' showing the condition of the 'air' we breathe. The air is being poisoned. Steve Sady, 1687 West SR 32, Peoa UT 84061 435-783-5889 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: FW:Bishop Oks Oly Gun Ban Date: 28 Jan 1999 21:35:00 -0700 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Cc: Janalee Tobias Today it was reported that Bishop Rob, acting as the executive director of the Utah Shooting Sports Council, said the proposed ban on guns at the Olympics was OK with him but a few details needed to be worked out. Bishop is a traitor and the USSC worthless if this is the best they can do. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: FW: Olympic Gun Ban Date: 28 Jan 1999 22:57:00 -0700 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Bcc: lputah@qsicorp.com Dear Ms. Carlson: Since you are a Democrat, you probably will not agree with my point here, but I would like to make my views known to you anyway. The Salt Lake Tribune reports today on efforts to stop legitimate concealed-carry permit holders from having their guns at the Olympics. As far as I am concerned, this is a travesty. A law-abiding citizen who has taken a course and test and who has had a background check and received a concealed-carry permit is *not* a threat to anyone except a criminal. By prohibiting concealed carry by decent Utah citizens at the Olympics, we are merely posting "Rape Me, Rob Me" signs all over the venue. A criminal, who will not respect the prohibition anyway, will know that they are safe to practice their crimes, as the "state" will have conveniently disarmed all citizens. There have been numerous recent studies and books that have demonstrated unequivocally that *concealed carry saves lives.* (Lott, Kleck, et. al.) When are you going to start helping our fellow citizens protect themselves from those who would prey on them? Jim Elwell 2522 Chadwick Street Salt Lake City, Utah 84106 801-483-2890 elwell@inconnect.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "S. Thompson" Subject: Re: FW:Bishop Oks Oly Gun Ban Date: 29 Jan 1999 01:13:52 -0700 I can't speak for Rob Bishop, but USSC has expressed its absolute opposition to this bill. We'll see.... Sarah PS: Don't flame ME. I'm no longer on the Board of USSC. At 09:35 PM 1/28/99 -0700, you wrote: > >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 10:32:54 -0700 >From: Jim Dexter >To: lputah@qsicorp.com >Cc: Janalee Tobias >Subject: Bishop OKs Oly Gun Ban > >Today it was reported that Bishop Rob, acting as the executive director of >the Utah Shooting Sports Council, said the proposed ban on guns at the >Olympics was OK with him but a few details needed to be worked out. > >Bishop is a traitor and the USSC worthless if this is the best they can do. > > > >- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "S. Thompson" Subject: URGENT ALERT! SB 122 Olympic Gun Control Date: 29 Jan 1999 01:14:41 -0700 We need your help to stop Olympic Gun Control! Sen. Mike Waddoups has introduced SB 122, Controlled Access Areas in Olympic Venues. You can read the bill at: http://www.le.state.ut.us/~1999/htmdoc/sbillhtm/SB0122.htm (Yes, this is the SAME Mike Waddoups who sponsored Utah's concealed carry and state pre-emption laws, although it appears that he may have an "evil twin". ) The Olympics language in this bill is IDENTICAL to that contained in David Jones's more ambitious gun control bill, HB 92. Objections to the bill: 1. The bill gives complete authority to an "Olympic Law Enforcement Commander" who may set whatever "rules" he likes. The person in charge of Olympic law enforcement should be a specifically designated person within a legally-constituted and accountable law enforcement agency, not some mysterious "commander". Non-legislative "rules" which restrict constitutional rights are entirely unacceptable. Any restrictions (all of which should be opposed anyway) should be passed by the legislature which is directly accountable to the people. 2. There is no provision for a starting date. This means gun control could be enforced at future Olympic venues as early as July of THIS year. 3. The bill should sunset IMMEDIATELY after the Olympics, not many months later on Dec. 21, 2002. 4. There is no provision for secure storage. People attending the Olympics need to be able to carry firearms for their own protection up until they enter the "secure area", if the legislature designated such an area. (I oppose prohibiting firearms in the secure areas too, but that's a separate issue.) Utah law requires safe storage at secure facilities. 5. The locations and areas of secure facilities are determined by the mysterious Olympic Commander. Theoretically the commander could enact secure facitlities _anywhere_, and make them as large as he wished. Thus anyone within a 10 mile radius of a venue could find that he LIVES in a "secure area" and must remove all firearms from his home. The specific land areas included in "secure areas" must be specified by the legislature. 6. People who drive to the Olympics must be able to store their own firearms in their vehicles. Parking lots must not be included in "secure areas". 7. "Dangerous weapon" in Utah includes such things as pen knives, nail files, rat tail combs, etc. Should such items be excluded from Olympic venues? If so, how do we communicate that to spectators so they aren't arrested? Should bringing such items into a venue be a felony? Thus... 8. There should be provisions for persons who simply "forget" they are carrying a "dangerous weapon" to store or check that weapon within walking distance of controlled access sites. 9. If the Olympics choose to forceably disarm spectators and visitors, they must accept full and unrestricted liability for any person killed or injured as a result of criminal activity within the secured area. 10. The language of the bill changes state law to say that a person with a permit to carry a concealed firearm may not carry concealed firearm in "CERTAIN LOCATIONS INCLUDING"... This open up exceptions to the law so that just about anyplace can be added to the list of excluded locations in the future. PLEASE DO THE FOLLOWING: 1. Contact Senator Waddoups and request that he withdraw this bill in its entirety. Senator Michael G. Waddoups 2005 W 5620 S Salt Lake City UT 84118 H 967-0225 O 355-1136 You may also leave a message via the Senate switchboard: 801-538-1035 or 877-585-8824 (toll free) 2. Contact your own Senator and request that he not support this bill, and that he request it be withdrawn. 3. Write letters to newspapers, call radio shows, etc. and voice your opposition to this legislation and to all legislation that would restrict the rights of law-abiding gun owners. (Newspaper articles will follow this alert, as soon as I can get them posted.) PLEASE REMEMBER TO BE POLITE! Thanks, as always, for your assistance. This is going to be a very difficult bill to defeat, so your help is truly needed. Sarah - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "S. Thompson" Subject: JAMA study in Deseret News Date: 29 Jan 1999 01:31:05 -0700 My response follows separately. Sarah http://www.desnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,30008532,00.html? > [Opinion] > Thursday, January 28, 1999 > > Keep guns from violent hands > [Format for printing] > Deseret News editorial > [E-mail story] > The tragic, senseless shooting death of young Anne > Marie Sleater allegedly by a mentally ill woman with a > [Image] record of misdemeanor convictions reinforces the need > to prohibit gun sales to anyone with proven violent > tendencies. The question, of course, is what criteria to > apply in restricting ownership. > The answer is simple enough to be implemented by > this year's Legislature and has nothing to do with > sensitivities surrounding mental illness, privacy and > stigmatization. It would not be a panacea, but > statistics prove it would help. It also would not > infringe upon legitimate rights of responsibile citizens > to keep and bear arms. > A recent article in the Journal of the American > Medical Association holds the key. It said that handgun > buyers with misdemeanor convictions are five times more > likely than those without criminal records to > subsequently be charged with offenses involving firearms > and violence. It reiterates the obvious: Guns in the > wrong hands are terribly dangerous, and not only those > with felony convictions should be precluded from > ownership. > Anyone convicted of misdemeanor assault, > disorderly conduct, illegally carrying a concealed > weapon, stalking, animal cruelty or anything of the sort > should be prohibited from owning a weapon. They should > forfeit that right with conviction for even a mildly > violent act, not only for those felonious in nature. > Such people have shown themselves to be a poor risk to > society and simply cannot be trusted with gun in hand. > A 15-year study tracked 5,177 people who legally > purchased handguns in California. Of the 2,735 who had > been convicted of at least one misdemeanor prior to > their purchases, 50 percent were later charged with new > crimes. More than 420 of those new crimes were serious > felonies including murder, manslaughter, rape, robbery > and aggravated assault. > Of the 2,442 who had no criminal record at all > when purchasing a weapon, only 10 percent committed > crimes later on, and only 60 of those were violent in > nature. > The evidence is overwhelming, and incidents such > as the recent tragedy at Triad Center could be curbed > with this relatively simple step. Needless tragedies > such as that one are a reminder the current system does > not work for those with evil intentions. It is far too > easy for guns to legally fall into unworthy hands for > illegal purposes. > [[I[Image] [Image] [Image] [Image] > > [Image] > > World & Nation + Utah + Sports + Business + Opinion + Front page - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "S. Thompson" Subject: JAMA and guns Date: 29 Jan 1999 01:34:36 -0700 The following article was submitted to the Deseret News (leters@desnews.com). The original article can be found at: http://www.desnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,30008532,00.html Twice in the past month, the Deseret News has drawn policy conclusions based on a study by Wintemute, et. al., in the Journal of the American Medical Association. Based on this study, you advocate barring persons convicted of a misdemeanor from legally purchasing firearms. What you apparently have not taken into consideration is that this is a seriously flawed study, conducted by a notoriously biased "researcher" who openly advocates gun control, funded by several of the largest gun control advocacy foundations in the nation, published in a journal noted for its advocacy of gun control and other "politically correct" liberal agendas, under the direction of an editor who was recently fired for confusing politics with science. Another clue was that the article was accompanied by an editorial by Sarah Brady (of Handgun Control, Inc.) who has no scientific or medical expertise whatever. No right-thinking person would take such an obvious piece of propaganda seriously. Wintemute's study does not even attempt to show that persons with prior misdemeanor convictions actually commit more firearms crimes. The end point for the study was being charged with a crime. Being charged does not make one guilty, and people with prior criminal records are more likely to be arrested as suspects. Second, the study did not determine whether legally purchased firearms were used to commit crimes. This data is necessary to draw any conclusions about who should be allowed to purchase firearms legally. Third, depriving people of basic rights based on statistics is legally and morally unsound. Young males commit more violent crimes than any other group. Should all young males be deprived of the right to keep and bear arms? Should all minorities be denied the same right because crime rates are often higher in minority neighborhoods? How far do we go with this? Gun bans based on education, income, gender, or race? Gun bans for people who are diabetic or nearsighted? Should we perhaps limit gun ownership to a "master race"? What ever happened to individual responsibility? Fourth, applying such a law retroactively would violate the constitutional ban on ex post facto laws. Applying it proactively would swamp the courts, since few people would plead guilty to a misdemeanor knowing they would be forever barred from possessing a firearm. Most important, the study ignored critical information. We know little about the misdemeanants who went on to commit crimes. Were they charged with minor offenses such as loitering? Or were they actually accused felons who plea-bargained their violent offenses down to misdemeanors? Wintemute notes that 52.1% of the "misdemeanants" originally were charged with felony offenses and 18.4% had been charged with a Violent Crime Index offense. Then he willfully ignores this data and lumps these criminals in with those who were never charged with a felony. Is it possible that the 50% of people convicted of misdemeanors who went on to commit further crimes were essentially the same ones originally charged with felonies? Wintemute didn't think this was important enough to warrant investigation, since his intent was to add misdemeanants to the growing list of people barred from firearms ownership. I disagree. It stands to reason that people who commit violent felonies, and are allowed to plea-bargain their way out of felony convictions and incarceration, are much more likely to commit a second violent crime. At the very least, such a study should be performed before policy decisions are made. I agree with the Deseret News that the current system doesn't work. In fact, no criminologic study has ever shown that background checks or waiting periods work. A program or policy that doesn't work will continue not to work no matter how widely it is expanded, or how many editors shout its praises. Rather than further restrict the rights of citizens by penalizing misdemeanants without regard for the offense, the legislature should consider eliminating the pernicious plea-bargain system which allows violent predators to get off with just a slap on the wrist and a misdemeanor conviction. This would keep the real criminals off the streets, as well as prevent them from obtaining firearms in the future, without the need to change existing firearms laws. Sarah Thompson, M.D. 902 Johnsonway Drive Sandy, UT 84094 801-566-1067 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "S. Thompson" Subject: Gun Control at Olympics a Done Deal? Date: 30 Jan 1999 22:05:07 -0700 According to the Deseret News, a gun ban at the Olympics is a "done deal". I guess we need to work harder... Sarah http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/1%2C1249%2C30009018%2C00.html > [deseretnews.com] > [1999 Utah legislature] > Saturday, January 30, 1999 > > Hill's sights set on guns and Games > [Format for pr[Image] > Ban at Olympics likely a done deal > [E-mail story] > By Jerry Spangler > Deseret News staff writer > [Image] > Holster them side-arms, pardner. There'll be no > gun play in this year's Legislature. > At least there probably won't be any lengthy > debate over banning concealed weapons in Utah schools, > churches or even private residences. The only gun bill > leaders want to address is a widely supported ban on > concealed firearms at Olympic venues in 2002. > Beyond that, "I don't think the other issues will > be addressed this year," said Senate President Lane > Beattie, R-West Bountiful. "The Olympic issue is urgent. > And there are legitimate debates for restricting weapons > in other areas. Personally, private-property rights > should take precedence over the right to carry a > concealed weapon. > "But," he said, ". . . this is not the year." > House Minority Leader Dave Jones, D-Salt Lake, is > loading up nonetheless. On Friday, he introduced a bill > that would limit where those who have permits can carry > their concealed weapons. > Current law says the only places you can't pack > your pistols are courtrooms, jails, mental hospitals and > the airport. > "You'd think it was a no-brainer, that people > would have the right in their own homes to say 'no > guns,'" said Jones. "They all seem like no-brainers. > Schools? Churches? Come on . . . ." > Under Jones' bill, permit holders would be banned > from packing heat to: > Schools except under special circumstances > authorized by the school district. > Churches if the churches wanted them banned. > Private residences where the homeowner didn't > want visitors packing guns into the house. > It would also allow the commander of public safety > for the 2002 Winter Games to ban weapons of all kinds at > Olympic venues. Sen. Mike Waddoups, R-Taylorsville, has > a similar bill addressing only the Olympics question. > Waddoups' ban of weapons at Olympic venues has the > support of just about everybody on both sides of the > debate. Its passage is a sure thing. > Meanwhile, there is no legislation that deals with > the perennially thorny issue of banning concealed > weapons on university campuses, allowing businesses to > ban weapons on their own private property or banning > guns from government buildings, including the Utah > Legislature. > Lawmakers' unwillingness to tackle gun issues irks > Jones, who has tried legislation in past years regarding > negligent storage of a firearm. He is frustrated that > Utah's powerful gun lobby has repeatedly thwarted what > he sees is common sense. > Beattie sponsored a bill last year to ban guns > from schools and churches. He killed his own bill the > night before a public hearing because of opposition in > the House. > "If not this year, then when? When is it going to > be a good year to debate it?" Jones said. "It is > strictly common sense that we don't want guns carried > into public schools. Some churches feel it a sacrilege > to have guns inside the house of the Creator, and they > ought to have the ability to say 'no.' " > Waddoups said he has been assured Jones' bill > "will be taken care of" in the House, a conservative > body that has resisted changes to Utah gun laws in the > past. "There is no good reason to bring the issue to the > floor. There is just not a compelling issue," he said. > Maybe it's not a compelling issue to Waddoups, but > Utahns have strong feelings about guns. > According to a Deseret News poll conducted in late > December, 90 percent of those questioned favored banning > guns from public schools; 86 percent wanted them banned > from churches, 86 percent from colleges and > universities, 76 percent from Olympic venues and 58 > percent from businesses open to the public. > That doesn't matter, Waddoups said, adding he will > likely be criticized by some gun-rights enthusiasts for > sponsoring the bill that allows guns to be banned from > Olympic venues. There are some, he said, who feel there > should be no restrictions whatsoever including packing > at the Olympics. > Still, Waddoups sees no contradiction in > sponsoring the ban on weapons at Olympic venues. > He said Utah's liberal concealed weapon laws were > instituted because people did not feel protected by > police, and they wanted to protect themselves. During > the Olympics, the security provided by thousands of > city, county, state and federal law-enforcement officers > will provide an unprecedented level of public safety > that will eliminate the need for concealed weapons. > "It is the high level of security that justifies > it," Waddoups said, noting his bill would apply only to > that time period when the Olympics and related events > are actually held. > Then it's back to business as usual. > [[I[Image] [Image] [Image] [Image] > > [Image] > > World & Nation + Utah + Sports + Business + Opinion + Front page ------------- To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to nolympics-request@aros.net with the line unsubscribe nolympics in the body. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "S. Thompson" Subject: Radio appearance Date: 31 Jan 1999 18:08:48 -0700 Steve Stromness of GrassRoots has asked me to fill in for him on the Jack Stockwell show tomorrow morning on KTKK (K-Talk) 630 AM. None of this is verified, and is thus subject to change, but I expect to be on starting at 8 AM. Please listen (those of you who are local, anyway) and feel free to call in. I'll be doing legislative updates on bills relating to gun control, asset forfeiture and maybe a few others. The call-in number is 801-254-5855. Sarah -