From: Scott Bergeson Subject: FW: Special Sales Tax for Gun Seller Date: 03 Aug 2000 10:43:23 -0600 ----- US-DIN head Clark Aposhian called my show yesterday and laid out a completely surrealistic story about many California communities tacking an additional 4% sales tax on all merchandise sold in a store that also sells firearms. IOW, you buy paper plates at the Sacramento K-Mart, and you'll pay 4% more in sales tax than you would at Albertson's because Albertson's doesn't sell guns. Naturally, I was skeptical because, while I know Clark to be an honest man, such a tax must surely be totally unconstitutional. So I sent a note to Rob Latham, JD, former legal counsel of the LPUtah and now a Bay Area resident. Sadly, he verifies the story and provides additional detail. It is an outrage. Yep. It's true. As for the constitutionality, the San Leandro case is working its way through the courts. See the story below. I went to Siegle's for the first day of its going out of business sale. The owners hung a big sign over the entrance behind the counter that led to a back storeroom that read "Oakland Sucks." Pretty sad. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2000/07/13/MN89677.DTL Last Gun Shop in Oakland Closing Steep tax ruined profits, owner says Janine DeFao, Chronicle Staff Writer Thursday, July 13, 2000 OAKLAND -- Mara Siegle has fired her last shot in her battle against Oakland's increasingly tough gun laws. After 57 years, she is closing the doors to her family's gun shop, the last one standing in Oakland. A few miles south, in neighboring San Leandro, the owner of Traders fears his store, the largest gun outlet in Northern California, could meet the same fate. But Anthony Cucchiara is determined to keep fighting. Yesterday, as Siegle rang up going-out-of-business bargains for a long line of customers under a sign decrying Oakland's ``illegal'' gun tax, an Alameda County Superior Court Judge dismissed Cucchiara's lawsuit over a similar tax in San Leandro. But Cucchiara's lawyers said he will appeal the ruling on the tax, which, they say, was designed to drive Traders out of business -- the same claim the owner of Siegle's Guns makes. Voters in both cities approved special taxes on gun sales and shops in June 1998. City leaders argued that those who sell guns should help pay for their costs to society, an estimated $32,000 for every gunshot wound treated. San Leandro's tax, approved narrowly, requires a seller to pay the city 3 percent of the proceeds from the sale of concealable firearms and their ammunition. Oakland's measure, which was approved by a wide margin, is farther reaching. Any store that sells guns or ammunition must pay the city $24 for every $1,000 made on any merchandise sold, from guns to fishing rods to books. Prior to the tax's approval, such businesses paid $1.20 for every $1,000 in receipts. ``It's a business-destruction tax,'' Siegle said yesterday as customers, new and old, crowded her store on West MacArthur Boulevard at Telegraph Avenue for her three-week closeout sale. The tax measures in Oakland and San Leandro were part of a campaign by officials in East Bay cities to control the sale of guns. Money from the taxes is used to fund gun- violence prevention programs. In addition, many of the cities have approved bans on the sale of so-called junk guns. Earlier this year, Oakland became the first city in the nation to ban the sale of pocket-size handguns known as ``ultracompacts'' -- a move that targeted Siegle's Guns. Oakland has ``strategically and selectively targeted Siegle's,'' said Siegle, who took over the North Oakland sporting goods store after her husband's death seven years ago. He had inherited it from his father, the founder. ``They wanted me gone,'' she said. ``They got their wish.'' City Councilman Henry Chang, who championed the tax, denied that was the city's intent, saying that Siegle's has been a responsible business and never the subject of complaints. ``We didn't do that to hurt her. It's to protect the young people who get hurt by gun violence,'' Chang said. Siegle's was the only store in Oakland subject to the tax because Super K-Mart opted to stop selling ammunition rather than pay it. Chang said Siegle's could have reduced the effect of the tax by opening a second store for nonfirearm sporting goods. But ``if you profit from guns, you need to pay part of the costs, too,'' he said. Siegle's customers called the tax unfair and warned it could backfire. ``If a person really wants a gun, they'll use illegal means to get one,'' said Roland Horn, a San Francisco target shooter. In Traders' lawsuit against San Leandro yesterday, Superior Court Judge James A. Richman threw out the case. Among Traders' arguments was that the city invalidly placed the tax measure on the ballot. Attorney Jack Leavitt, who represents the gun store, said he will appeal to the Court of Appeal in San Francisco. ``With the 2 percent profit margin Traders makes on most transactions, a 3 percent tax can essentially put it out of business. . . . Our position is the city is less interested in raising revenue than in putting Traders out of business,'' he said. San Leandro Assistant City Attorney Liane M. Randolph said the city intends to use the money toward crime prevention and anti-violence programs. But because of the lawsuit, Traders had not paid the city the money owed -- $110,000 over two years -- until recently. The law does affect an additional six or seven smaller gun sellers, including pawnshops, in the city, officials said. Randolph said city officials do hope the tax will ``discourage the sale of handguns in San Leandro.'' E-mail Janine DeFao at jdefao@sfgate.com. ©2000 San Francisco Chronicle Page A17 LPUtah LPUtah -- This message sent via listserver "lputah@qsicorp.com" LPUtah -- All messages are the sole responsibility of the sender. LPUtah -- Support: Jim Elwell, email: elwell@inconnect.com LPUtah - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott Bergeson Subject: FW: NRA coup in WP, TX lawsuit Date: 07 Aug 2000 09:44:20 -0600 ----- Reply-To: chris@nealknox.com August 6 Neal Knox Report -- Today's Washington Post Sunday Supplement Magazine has an unusual article by Michael Powell, complete with a photo of Wayne LaPierre on the cover and full page photos of Jim Baker and me inside (and a small pic of me standing in front of the Stonewall Jackson statue at the Manassas battleground). What's unusual, for the Post, is that Powell doesn't portray any of us as nutcases. Powell does his best to explain us gun folks, and the ongoing internal wars within NRA. In some ways he succeeded -- though there are many factual errors. The gist of the piece is that NRA is restored to power through the leadership of Wayne, since getting rid of us harder line folks, but that Wayne is in danger of repeating my mistakes of being too harsh in support of the Second Amendment. For the record, no Federal or significant state gun laws passed during my watch at NRA-ILA. When Powell called me last spring and asked for an interview, I told him I would talk to him as much as he wanted about the gun issue, but wouldn't talk about NRA internal affairs -- my standard answer, which has chased off reporters for the New York Times, Nightline and many others wanting me to give them dirt on NRA. Powell stuck to the deal; we talked only about the history of the "gun control" movement and my role in it. But over the Fourth of July he sent me an email to check a few facts -- such as if the .22 rifle my wife Jay was given when she was nine was the same one she had in her college dorm when we began dating (I'm sure that tidbit will cause many Post readers to brand us as nutcases. However, in that email he told me he had spoken with NRA Director/movie producer John Milius and other board members at the Charlotte meeting. "They were suprisingly open in talking about the plot to save LaPierre's job, install Heston and beat you. Milius claims that (NRA public relations/advertising/fundraising contractor Tony) Makris was behind much of it, that he and Makris met in Hollywood several times to plot strategy. And, Milius further claimed, they accomplished much of their victory by lying for weeks and weeks." Powell sent me the quote from Milius which appeared in today's magazine: "We were facing a genuine and extremely well-organized coup d'etat," Milius told Powell. "So we used our best techniques: lying, cheating and disinformation. I didn't tell the truth for weeks." That's when I broke my rule about not talking about NRA internal affairs. I emailed him back: "Milius was correct about Makris being mainly behind it. Of course he was. He was the one who would have been out of a job. We had too much invested in Wayne to throw him away. "It wasn't a corporate takeover or coup d'etat; it was a mutiny of the (Executive Vice President against a majority of the board), assisted by NRA vendors determined to keep some very lucrative contracts. The same vendors for the same reason ran the expensive and successful advertising and mail campaigns that have succeeded in removing all those who voted against Wayne in '97." It was probably too late for any of that to get into his story, and it's just as well. But since what happened has now been published, thanks to Milius, I figured you NRA members needed to know about it. You remember the movie "Wag The Dog?" About the Presidential political operative who got a Hollywood producer to fake a war to divert attention from his sexcapade with a young woman? The Hollywood guy told the press because he just had to get credit for his production. I guess, being Hollywood, John just had to get a credit line. You now have a better understanding of the reason for the Bylaw I'm co-sponsoring to prohibit NRA employees or vendors from being involved in -- or funding -- NRA elections. BTW -- Michael Powell is going to be talking about this article at 1 p.m. Monday on www.washingtonpost.com/liveonline. ------------ There's going to be a $10 per plate Civil Liberties Defense Foundation fundraising barbecue and auction at the Lubbock, Texas, Civics Center Thursday night for the lawsuit being brought by Rep. Suzanna Gratia Hupp, former Sen. Jerry Patterson and other legislators against the cities suing the gun industry. The suit is based on two points -- denying Texans their 2nd Amendment rights and violating the Constitution's Commerce Clause. What's different from the gun manufacturers' suit against the cities (also on Commerce grounds) is that this one is brought under Sec. 1983 of the U.S. Civil Rights Act against the mayors, councilmen and other officials responsible for the lawsuits. Sec. 1983 makes those responsible for violating our civil liberties *personally* liable, and unable to get their state or municipal governments to pay their legal fees. Even if it doesn't win -- and lawyers tell me it's highly winnable -- it will hurt the mayors and councilmen fighting the suits in the same way the gunmakers are being hurt by the expense of fighting the cases. It would sure chill the cities' ardor for more gun manufacturer lawsuits. It amazes me that the gun industry isn't supporting this suit. For more info, see http://www.libertydefense.com -- Help us keep you informed! Send your Firearms Coalition dues to: Neal Knox Associates 7771 Sudley Road, No. 44 Manassas, VA 20109 Suggested dues are the price of a box of ammunition -- $15 - $25. This is the Coalition Alerts list. To subscribe or unsubscribe send mail to fco-request@lists.best.com with the word "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" in the body. Archives of these messages are stored at http://www.nealknox.com/alerts/. Copyright (c) 2000 Neal Knox Associates. All Rights Reserved. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott Bergeson Subject: FW: A judge's Pro-Second Web site Date: 08 Aug 2000 11:54:45 -0600 ----- I am a Judge, and I am on YOUR side in your fight to protect our Constitution and our freedoms. I am not running for office, selling anything, or asking for anything except your quick look at my new web-site with the hope that you will help me promote it. I am trying to use my background to influence and persuade people to support and defend the 2nd Amendment, as well as the rest of our Constitution. I have been told by many people that my site has the potential to be one of the best and most effective tools in our political struggle. Please look at it, and help in anyway that you can: http://www.velek.com/gun I am not using any bulk e-mail programs, but rather I have visited web-sites with similar philosophies to my own, primarily through a search for 2nd Amendment sites, and I then manually copied your addresses for this mail. I therefore hope that you are not offended by this or consider this as just 'spam'; in any event, this is just a single mailing, and with the exception of a possible announcement of another major development, I will not be sending you more mail so you needn't worry that I will be harassing you. I hope that you will agree that I have acted in a reasonable, responsible way, and if you are annoyed or offended by it, then I apologize; I assure you now that I will not be sending out repeated mailings nor will your address be given to anyone else. Thank you. Bill Velek PLEASE recommend my web-site to one pro-gun person today. If you're Pro-Gun: http://www.velek.com/gun If you're Anti-Gun: http://www.velek.com/bill/boycott - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott Bergeson Subject: The Gun Culture Date: 09 Aug 2000 14:00:10 -0600 http://www.FreeRepublic.com/forum/a398c590448da.htm Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works. The Gun Culture Culture/Society Opinion (Published) Keywords: GUNS, CULTURE Source: Yuma Arizona Prospector Published: 2 July, 2000 Author: Dean Weingarten Posted on 08/05/2000 11:12:20 PDT by marktwain The Gun Culture is an essential part of America. About half of American homes have guns, and the United States has more guns per person than most countries, with the possible exception of Switzerland. Members of the gun culture are better educated, more prosperous, and have lower levels of crime than those who have not integrated into the Gun Culture, or who have been intimidated from joining the Gun Culture by the incessant attacks against it in the old media and various legislatures. Children who are members of the Gun Culture have less problems, and commit less crime, than those who are outside of the Culture. The Gun Culture is noted for a strong belief in individual rights, the necessity to limit goverment, individual responsibility, ethics, and integrity. Ask around gun shops and shooting clubs. You will find that bad checks are virtually unknown. I have had none.. zero... for the hundreds of students who have gone throught the Isher Enterprises course. Interestingly, there are almost no representatives of the Gun Culture in the old media. It appears that members of the Gun Culture are forced out of the old media early in their careers by a form of cultural discrimination. I personally had a close friend that this happened to. In the Gun Culture, reality matters. Image is of only marginal importance. "I thought it was unloaded" is no excuse. In the old media, image is everything. Reality is of only marginal importance. Truth is what you can convince enough people to believe. Individuals do not matter, except as they can be used to manipulate groups. The Gun Culture used to be the dominant culture in the United States. While it still has more members than other cultures in the U.S., it has lost its dominant position to the old media. The Gun Culture opens its arms to all who wish to join. In America, Switzerland, Israel, and some Scandinavian and South American countries, anyone can become a member of the Gun Culture. In most countries of the world, the Gun Culture is the exclusive province of the ruling elites. Shooters will find that they have an invitation into these elites as they show their knowledge and interests in social circles around the rest of the world. A person with knowledge of personal arms is assumed to be in the elite, just as knowledge of arms separated the feudal nobility from the peasants. Perhaps Machiavelli said it best in "The Prince" "There can be no proper relation between one who is armed and one who is not; nor is it reasonable to expect that one who is armed will obey one who is not, or that the latter will feel secure amoung servants who are armed." In the United States, this was to be avoided by recognizing the right of all to keep and bear arms. As Patrich Henry said, "The great object is that every man be armed... Everyone who is able may have a gun." I am a proud member of the Gun Culture. It is the representation and defender of all that is best in America. Dean Weingarten has been teaching fiream techniques and safety for more than 25 years. He has been both a peace officer and a military officer. He is the current lead instructor for Isher Enterprises, which offers the course necessary to obtain a concealed weapons permit in Arizona. He is certified by the State of Arizona, the State of Louisiana, and the National Rifle Association. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott Bergeson Subject: Burst the Registration Bubble Date: 09 Aug 2000 20:11:21 -0600 Written By: Russ Howard Bursting the Registration Bubble http://keepandbeararms.com/newsarchives/XcNewsPlus.asp?cmd=view&articleid=414 by Russ Howard Russ.Howard@USA.net Former NRA Director Hate to burst the bubble, folks, but let's face it: We already have registration, and NRA management supports it. The Clinton plan, by making registration official, extending it, and actually calling it registration, serves to conceal the fact that we already have it. We already have gun registration under the Gun Control Act of 1968, supported by Charlton Heston & NRA management. Under GCA68, dealers who go out of business must turn over their lists to the government. GCA68 created a dangerous system of registration lists kept locally across the nation. The government knows the location of each of these lists, and they know who's responsible for them. Once the government decides to do so, it can simply go to the gun stores and confiscate or copy the lists, which to some extent it has already been doing. Who will stop them? Who will punish them? Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes? We have registration through NRA management's InstaCheck program. Is it really likely that the people who murdered Vicky & Sammy Weaver and 24 children at Waco and then covered up the evidence, who not only were never punished for it but arranged to give each other national standing ovations, who work for a government that practices a religion of secrecy, lies, oathbreaking, lawbreaking, and invasion of privacy - is it really likely that they're afraid to keep some stinking records? Get real. A prudent man must assume they're keeping the records already. NRA management refused to consider viable alternatives to InstaCheck whereby dealers could check backgrounds without the government knowing who's buying a gun, even after its Board of Directors - that great model of decisiveness, strength, intelligence, independence, and voluntarism - asked it to. We have registration through NRA management's "Shall Issue" concealed carry programs. NRA management has fought to quarantine Vermont carry in Vermont. Vermont carry does not involve registration. NRA management refuses to back, and threatens to punish, legislators who introduce or support Vermont carry in other states. Is this "great struggle" against registration yet another grand Beltway Kabuki, a good cop/bad cop play acted out on a national scale, choreographed to wow and pacify natives who've been stuck in NRA management's version of Plato's Cave for so long they've lost the ability to distinguish the play, in which they all have a part, from reality? What better way to help us avoid facing the painful truth that we already have registration, which our "leaders" signed off on, than to stage an epic battle where we "fight" and "kill" registration? We now have an NRA management that holds joint press conferences with Jim & Sarah Brady to introduce laws promoting "zero tolerance full enforcement of existing gun controls", an NRA management that proudly promotes Soviet style snitch-on-your-neighbor billboards proclaiming "Report Illegal Guns. Call 1-800...", an NRA management that openly supports a law that provides for 10-year prison sentences for teachers who carry concealed to defend themselves and their students. Meanwhile, NRA members continue to send money. Be sure to send yours so LaPierre, Beltway & Co. can keep their $20,000-a-month salaries, $15,000- a-month "expense" accounts, and who-knows-what other perks; so they can keep flushing your money over to anti-gun politicians and sweetheart vendors. In fact, it's time the "Winning" Team got another raise, don't you think? They sure do. Registration is Dead! Long Live Registration! Russ Howard - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Joe Waldron Subject: HULL AND LEAVITT SUPPORT GUN GRABBERS Date: 11 Aug 2000 14:58:06 -0700 I'll feel a lot safer visiting Arizona and Utah after reading the following press release. You can read the entire release at http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/000811/az_safe_st.html Joe W Friday August 11, 6:00 am Eastern Time Press Release SOURCE: Safe Schools, Safe Students Victoria Reggie Kennedy: 'Remember: The Child You Save May Be Your Own.' Endorsing Safe Schools, Safe Students and Their Proactive Child Safety Campaign - Safe Communities = Safe Schools PRESCOTT, Ariz., Aug. 11 /PRNewswire/ -- Safe Schools, Safe Students is proud to announce its partnerships with some of the leading child advocacy groups in the United States. Safe Schools, Safe Students, organizer and coordinator of Safe Communities = Safe Schools = Safe Students week is working diligently to provide community/family based solutions to today's violent youth problems. Victoria Reggie Kennedy, President of Common Sense about Kids and Guns and wife of the Honorable Senator Edward Kennedy (D) Ma. stated earlier today: ``Common Sense and the unprecedented, diverse coalition of organizations endorsing the message of safety and responsibility have joined together with Safe Schools, Safe Students because of one overreaching principle: the safety and protection of our children is paramount. Safe Schools, Safe Students and their Safe Communities = Safe Schools Awareness campaign are united in our belief that we can best protect our children by addressing the issue of child safety in a responsible and inclusive way. We are proud to endorse their campaign. Remember: the child you save may be your own.'' <<>> Additional quotes and endorsements include: ``Safe Schools, Safe Students is an excellent illustration and nationwide model of how Arizona's citizens can work together to help better the lives of the children in our state. You have done a wonderful job.'' Jane Dee Hull, Governor, State of Arizona. (several other AZ legislators were also quoted) ``I appreciate and applaud Safe Schools, Safe Students willingness to help make our communities and children's lives a little safer.'' Michael O. Leavitt, Governor, State of Utah. SOURCE: Safe Schools, Safe Students - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Karl Pearson" Subject: FW: Safe Schools = Safe Students... Date: 11 Aug 2000 16:48:28 -0600 Here's an email I mailed to Mary Beaumont at safety@stwnews.org who is listed as the contact person for the Press Release which quoted Governor Mike (take the guns away) Leavitt. This press release was just sent out to utah-firearms and is from Prescott, AZ and is about Victoria Reggie Kennedy. Please feel free to respond to me and set me straight, if that's what I need. Karl L. Pearson Senior uniVerse Database Analyst Senior Unix/NT/Win Analyst karlp@colubs.com -----Original Message----- Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 4:45 PM Hi and I appreciate your time. Please explain to me why advertising that my children are unprotected in their schools will keep criminals with guns and malicious children with guns out. Please explain to me why you don't advocate allowing a few highly-trained teachers, or parents who are fully qualified, to be in the schools carrying automatic weapons. Israel has fully stopped all terrorist attacks in their schools by arming all their teachers. Can't we do the same? Karl L. Pearson Senior uniVerse Database Analyst Senior Unix/NT/Win Analyst karlp@colubs.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Peter Chamberlain" Subject: RE: Safe Schools = Safe Students... Date: 11 Aug 2000 17:08:41 -0600 Please post her response, if you get one. Peter -----Original Message----- [mailto:owner-utah-firearms@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Karl Pearson Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 4:48 PM Here's an email I mailed to Mary Beaumont at safety@stwnews.org who is listed as the contact person for the Press Release which quoted Governor Mike (take the guns away) Leavitt. This press release was just sent out to utah-firearms and is from Prescott, AZ and is about Victoria Reggie Kennedy. Please feel free to respond to me and set me straight, if that's what I need. Karl L. Pearson Senior uniVerse Database Analyst Senior Unix/NT/Win Analyst karlp@colubs.com -----Original Message----- Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 4:45 PM Hi and I appreciate your time. Please explain to me why advertising that my children are unprotected in their schools will keep criminals with guns and malicious children with guns out. Please explain to me why you don't advocate allowing a few highly-trained teachers, or parents who are fully qualified, to be in the schools carrying automatic weapons. Israel has fully stopped all terrorist attacks in their schools by arming all their teachers. Can't we do the same? Karl L. Pearson Senior uniVerse Database Analyst Senior Unix/NT/Win Analyst karlp@colubs.com - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott Bergeson Subject: FW: Thinking Tanks -- Not the Kind that Go Boom Date: 11 Aug 2000 19:50:19 -0600 ----- ... One thing I've seen mentioned in four or five different accounts about [GWB] is his habit of reading a book, then inviting the writer for dinner to talk about his ideas in depth. A few random thoughts related to my favorite issue. 1) I would dearly like to make sure GWB reads "That Every Man Be Armed" by Stephen Halbrook, and "More Guns, Less Crime" by John Lott. Lott especially could have an enormous impact. One thought that has occured to me is to send a letter to Cheney suggesting that GWB read those two books. Might as well try to drop the seed on the most receptive ground possible. There are other books and writers who I think could have about as big an impact, but those are the two who I think could really get his attention. 2) The media is all excited about Lieberman's Jewish roots. Somebody should drop a line to Aaron Zelman and suggest a very public endorsement of Bush. (He's bright enough to work out the quid pro quo details himself.) I doubt he could get much media coverage, but maybe the Bushies could work on that, though frankly I doubt they would. But even if they won't, being on record and being able to show you're bringing some voters to the table could be useful down the line. Problem being of course that we've seen some evidence that Bush at least publicly is trying to hold gun rights groups at a distance. 3) Along the same vein, the Second Amendment Sisters should publicly ask for a meeting with Bush. They're proven, they have at least some connections unto the halls of power, they're telegenic, they're awful hard for the media or the slicksters at HCI to attack or ignore, and they can tap into some pretty awesome conservative support. And the plus for the Bushies is that if its played right, they could draw yet more support away from the Gore unit among women. Go, SASsy ladies, go! 4) Suzanna Gratia-Hupp. She's the nuclear weapon of the gun rights movement. Bush knows her for sure, given that he signed the CCW bill she championed. If she's willing and interested she seems to me to be the perfect person to work with the campaign on those issues. Maybe she already is; I certainly don't know. 5) The NRA. Watch them vigilantly. THey're making all the right noises at the moment, other than the wretched Project Exile foolishness. But even that will play well with the public, and perhaps the prospect of actually enforcing all those tyrannical laws will make some people realise just how bad they are. 6) Don't forget Senate and House races. We're going to need every vote no matter who wins - and even more so if Gore pulls off a miracle. Check GOA ratings for your Senators and congerscritter, and be ruthless. I've been including open references to his voting record and the imminent election in my letters to the weakest members of my delegation for over a year. No idea if they pay attention to that sort of veiled threat - but I have noticed that Charlie Bass is a lot better about answering my letters this year than the past couple. 7) Go shooting to remind yourself what its all about. Drop by sometime and we'll use my range. Take a novice along and teach them if you get the chance - for the price of a box or two of 22 ammo you might "buy" a bunch of very useful votes. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott Bergeson Subject: Re: Fw: NRA-ILA FAX ALERT - Vol. 7, No. 32 Date: 12 Aug 2000 11:21:27 -0600 ----- > > If you are a pro-gun Democrat who does not agree with the > > apparent abandonment by the national leadership of your > > party, you can contact the Democratic National Committee > > at (202) 863-8000 to ask why the party bosses have > > targeted our Second Amendment rights for extinction. Let me emphasis that sentence by repetition, and say "why should democrats have all the fun"? If you can spare the ten minutes and the coupla bucks to make the call, I'm just SURE the DNC would like to hear from "swing voters", too. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott Bergeson Subject: FW: Re: Burst the Registration Bubble Date: 12 Aug 2000 11:43:37 -0600 ----- I received the following letter from Michael Jackson in response to an op-ed piece written by Russ Howard, Former NRA Director, criticizing the NRA for compromising on firearm rights. Below Michael's letter is my commentary, and below that is Russ Howard's article. Dave Michael Jackson (micatjackson@uswest.net) wrote: To Russ and His followers - Besides a lot of envy and insinuations, I get the following out of your hate mail about the NRA: First: We should not join or support the NRA Second: The NRA wants every gun and every gun owner in America to be registered Third: The NRA, Sarah Brady, and other fascist members of government are one in the same. Are you for real? Or are you just another idiot with a lot of criticism and no suggestions for improvement? If you've bothered to read this far, I'll say it again so boneheads like you might FINALLY get the message: THE NRA IS THE ONLY GAME IN TOWN. IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, HELP US CHANGE IT, BUT DON'T RECOMMEND PEOPLE NOT SUPPORT THE SOLE ORGANIZATION FIGHTING FOR OUR RIGHTS AND OUR NATION! Can I explain it any plainer? I see not one suggestion to improve anything in your letter. Are you just another "legend in your own mind" cretin or could it be YOU want the 20K/Mo? I have never heard the NRA claim to be as you charge. I tried being nice to you [blanks]... I got no response; no one bothered to help improve things. I have concerns about the NRA too, but a lot more about people who want to stand in the way of freedom such as you. So now maybe I'll be half as insulting as you; maybe then I'll get yout attention. Express your opinion - mostly because if you keep this kind of rot inside, you'll decay into less than you already are. Michael ___________________________ Dave's comments below: NRA is NOT the only game in town. You might try Gun Owners of America. When NRA has been rolling over playing dead, GOA has pushed aggressively and saved many of our rights from extinction. Why do you think Orrin Hatch hates that organization so much? At least you get the truth from it. And it blasts away with both barrels! You say you too have "concerns" with the NRA. Just what concerns do you have with it? And how would you propose to change the NRA without letting people know about those concerns? As I see it, Russ did an excellent job in presenting facts, many of which I've seen with my own eyes. Look at NRA's support for Mike Leavitt and Orrin Hatch, when they could have supported Glen Davis and Greg Hawkins, far more ardent defenders of the Second Amendment. Look also at the much touted "Project Exile" which seeks to "vigorously enforce" all gun laws that we fought for years to keep OFF the books. If people like Russ weren't trying to wake people up, which is exactly what his letter is supposed to do, just how do you propose to "CHANGE IT"? I am also sick of the USSC and its compromising ways, which are supported by the NRA. We have lost more ground because of willingness to compromise than because of opponents such as Sarah Brady. I am a voting member of the NRA, but my one vote to clean up the NRA just isn't enough. At least Russ is planting in people's minds the seeds that have to take root before we can clean house on the NRA. I just hope it's not too late and that not all of our rights have been compromised away before that can happen. Dave Russ Howard's article below: Written By: Russ Howard Bursting the Registration Bubble http://keepandbeararms.com/newsarchives/XcNewsPlus.asp?cmd=view&articleid=414 by Russ Howard Russ.Howard@USA.net Former NRA Director Hate to burst the bubble, folks, but let's face it: We already have registration, and NRA management supports it. The Clinton plan, by making registration official, extending it, and actually calling it registration, serves to conceal the fact that we already have it. We already have gun registration under the Gun Control Act of 1968, supported by Charlton Heston & NRA management. Under GCA68, dealers who go out of business must turn over their lists to the government. GCA68 created a dangerous system of registration lists kept locally across the nation. The government knows the location of each of these lists, and they know who's responsible for them. Once the government decides to do so, it can simply go to the gun stores and confiscate or copy the lists, which to some extent it has already been doing. Who will stop them? Who will punish them? Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes? We have registration through NRA management's InstaCheck program. Is it really likely that the people who murdered Vicky & Sammy Weaver and 24 children at Waco and then covered up the evidence, who not only were never punished for it but arranged to give each other national standing ovations, who work for a government that practices a religion of secrecy, lies, oathbreaking, lawbreaking, and invasion of privacy - is it really likely that they're afraid to keep some stinking records? Get real. A prudent man must assumes they're keeping the records already. NRA management refused to consider viable alternatives to InstaCheck whereby dealers could check backgrounds without the government knowing who's buying a gun, even after its Board of Directors - that great model of decisiveness, strength, intelligence, independence, and voluntarism - asked it to. We have registration through NRA management's "Shall Issue" concealed carry programs. NRA management has fought to quarantine Vermont carry in Vermont. Vermont carry does not involve registration. NRA management refuses to back, and threatens to punish, legislators who introduce or support Vermont carry in other states. Is this "great struggle" against registration yet another grand Beltway Kabuki, a good cop/bad cop play acted out on a national scale, choreographed to wow and pacify natives who've been stuck in NRA management's version of Plato's Cave for so long they've lost the ability to distinguish the play, in which they all have a part, from reality? What better way to help us avoid facing the painful truth that we already have registration, which our "leaders" signed off on, than to stage an epic battle where we "fight" and "kill" registration? We now have an NRA management that holds joint press conferences with Jim & Sarah Brady to introduce laws promoting "zero tolerance full enforcement of existing gun controls", an NRA management that proudly promotes Soviet style snitch-on-your-neighbor billboards proclaiming "Report Illegal Guns. Call 1-800...", an NRA management that openly supports a law that provides for 10-year prison sentences for teachers who carry concealed to defend themselves and their students. Meanwhile, NRA members continue to send money. Be sure to send yours so LaPierre, Beltway & Co. can keep their $20,000-a-month salaries, $15,000-a-month "expense" accounts, and who-knows-what other perks; so they can keep flushing your money over to anti-gun politicians and sweetheart vendors. In fact, it's time the "Winning" Team got another raise, don't you think? They sure do. Registration is Dead! Long Live Registration! Russ Howard - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott Bergeson Subject: paper maintaining list of anti-gun scandals Date: 12 Aug 2000 12:20:24 -0600 http://www.alamanceind.com/newfol~2/nation.html - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: charles hardy Subject: Make-A-Wish caves to animal rights extreemists Date: 14 Aug 2000 17:23:11 -0600 And current or past supporters of Make-A-Wish may want to let them know what you think of this decision. From Sunday's SLTrib: Hunting for a Wish Sunday, August 13, 2000 The famous Make-A-Wish Foundation, noted by people everywhere with justifiable affection for making dreams possible for terminally-ill young people, has decided to limit its altruistic mission. Not because it is running out of money. Not because dying youngsters are asking for more grandiose wish fulfillment, but because its governing board wants to be politically correct. The Phoenix-based charity's board recently announced that it will no longer grant a youngster's wish if it involves hunting or the shooting sports. A spokesman claimed the decision came out of safety concerns, but this seems but a feeble excuse to dissemble a more accurate reason -- placating angry animal rights groups. Four years ago, animal rights activists exploded in vociferous wrath when the Make-A-Wish Foundation sent a terminally-ill teen-ager, Erik Ness, on an Alaska hunting trip -- something he ardently desired. Some animal rights proponents are loud, emotional and bullying. It is hard for many to buck them. It is too bad Make-A-Wish could not muster the backbone to do so. Make-A-Wish Foundation exists to grant "last requests" of youthful cancer patients and others with terminal diseases. It's primary criterion should be the physical and financial ability to carry out the recipient's request, whether it is for a hunting trip, a visit to Disney World or a trip to Jerusalem. Once it starts down the road of political correctness, supporting and eschewing activities dictated by groups and individuals it respects or fears, its basic purpose is compromised. It no longer grants last requests, but only certain ones. Moreover, hunting is every bit as legitimate as any other endeavor. It has been practiced by people since the dawn of human activity. Hunters were among the earliest folks to realize the benefits of wild places and the need to preserve them. Theodore Roosevelt, perhaps the most conservation-minded president in U.S. history, was a thoroughgoing hunter and fond of the shooting sports, too. It is too bad the Make-A-Wish Foundation has decided its mission will be conditional and less inclusive. It is too bad it listens better to anti-hunting and anti-shooting groups than it does to the wishes and dreams of the terminally-ill youngsters it was created to serve. ================================================================== Charles C. Hardy Utah Email Coordinator--Women Against Gun Control - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott Bergeson Subject: NRA brings ads to party Date: 15 Aug 2000 10:40:10 -0600 Is she daft? "It [the ad] claims we're trying to take away people's rights," said Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, New York Democrat, during a forum yesterday on gun violence. "You show me one thing I'm doing to take away people's rights." The National Rifle Association is sounding a media counterpoint to the Democratic convention with ads asking party officials why they're so hostile to the right to bear arms. (8/15/00) URL: http://washtimes.com/national/default-200081523282.htm - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: charles hardy Subject: Tiger mauls woman in Boise Date: 18 Aug 2000 12:45:59 -0600 Did anyone see the report in yesterday's DesNews or on last nights TV news about the woman who was mauled by the tiger in the Boise Zoo? I found something interesting. From the DesNews article: " Boise Police Sgt. Rich Schnebly was among the visitors. He fired two warning shots and the tiger backed up. Schnebly moved toward [the victim] and the cat stepped forward. He fired another shot, Taiga retreated and the cage door was shut. " [The victim] said she excruciating pain in her left leg and assumed the tiger had broken her femur. Hours later she learned one of the bullets had snapped the bone and caused some nerve damage." Now I'm wondering, exactly how did a "warning shot" hit the victim's leg? Was it from a ricochete inside what I presume to be a concrete building? If it was a ricochete, why didn't a trained officer realise that lodging the bullet squarly in the tiger's body--while somewhat tragic--would have been the safest way to discharge his gun? For some reason did the officer think that shooting in the general direction of the tiger (and victim) was the safest way to discharche his gun? Or was the officer aiming at the tiger and missed and then chose to call it "a warning shot" rather than a missed shot? In any event, how might it have been reported if an armed citizen with CCW had done EXACTLY what the officer did? Would we now be reading about how he needlessly injured the victim by shooting when he wasn't qualified? ================================================================== Charles C. Hardy Utah Email Coordinator--Women Against Gun Control -