From: "Scott Bergeson" Subject: FW: Misguided Mom Counter Rally Date: 01 May 2001 17:18:53 -0600 "Militia Bob" and the Utah Freedom Association (UFA) are sponsoring a counter-rally to the Million Misguided Mom's anti-gun rally on Sunday, May 13. The Moms are meeting on the steps of the state capitol at 1:00 PM on Mother's Day. We will meet down the hill by the Indian statue. Please dress neatly for this media event, and bring signs and flags. The UFA understands that most of us RKBA-types would rather be home with mom, but the unloved marching moms will win the media spotlight if we don't show up with more people. For more info, contact Militia Bob at 277-0085. Please pass this notice on to all your friends and associates who support the Second Amendment. Thank you. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott Bergeson Subject: Film says false FBI reports mar Danforth's Waco study Date: 02 May 2001 17:00:34 -0600 Film says false FBI reports mar Danforth's Waco study ---------- In a new documentary, Emmy Award-winning filmmaker Michael McNulty charges that former Sen. John Danforth's report on the Branch Davidian tragedy relied on flawed and even falsified data as to the types of weapons and ammo carried by FBI agents. (04/30/01) http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/4/27/185447.shtml - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Bergeson" Subject: Senate Could Soon Consider Ban on Private Sales, Restricting Gun Shows Date: 04 May 2001 08:29:27 -0600 Senate Could Soon Consider Ban on Private Sales, Restricting Gun Shows -- Please use the pre-written message below to help direct your comments to the Senate today! Gun Owners of America E-Mail/FAX Alert 8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408 http://www.gunowners.org/ (Wednesday, May 2, 2001) -- What do education and gun shows have in common? Nothing really, but Senators could soon be voting to seriously restrict your Second Amendment rights as debate over the education bill, S. 1, is now shifting into high gear. Democratic Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island has introduced legislation to severely restrict your ability to sell and buy firearms at gun shows, and he could offer this bill as an amendment to the education bill. Sen. Reed's bill, S. 767, would not only ban the private sales of firearms at gun shows -- if the buyer refuses to be registered through a background check -- it could conceivably drive gun shows out of business altogether. Considering that last year's Republican-controlled Senate voted repeatedly in favor of gun control, there is no guarantee that the Reed bill would lose right now -- especially since the Senate is evenly split between Republicans and Democrats. Anti-gun McCain "compromise" in the works. Further complicating matters is the fact that Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) has teamed up with Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-CT), Al Gore's vice-presidential running mate, to put together a gun control "compromise" that could be one of the most dangerous anti-gun bills introduced in the 107th Congress. The McCain-Lieberman compromise also restricts your ability to buy and sell firearms, and because it is "bipartisan," it could actually get more votes than the Reed provision. Gun owners should contact their Senators because McCain might very well try to add this legislation to the education bill. While McCain has still not officially introduced his bill, there have been enough written and published statements from his office to determine what the particulars are. Gun owners should be concerned about this legislation because it would, in a nutshell: * Ban private sales at gun shows unless the buyer submits to a registration background check; * Discourage most gun shows from even occurring, as the liability for promoters would be immense -- they could land in jail for very technical violations of procedure; and finally, * Encourage authorities to arrest and convict honest gun owners who may inadvertently violate one of the many federal anti-gun laws, several of which carry severe penalties for mere technicalities. For example, a law-abiding citizen who innocently drives by a school with a gun in his car could find himself being sent to prison as a result of McCain's increased funding for more agents to crack down on "gun crimes." Or a parent who uses the family handgun to go target shooting with his 15-year old son (when the son does not have written permission to handle the firearm in his possession) could find himself facing severe criminal charges. Or even worse, an individual who uses a gun for self-defense in a way that a court subsequently finds to be inappropriate could be sent to prison for a MANDATORY MINIMUM of five years. ACTION: These examples are just the tip of the iceberg. And that is why your help is needed today. Taking on someone who is widely regarded as an American hero, especially by the media, is no easy task. But hero or not, if a U.S. Senator is responsible for legislation that would deliver a crushing blow to our rights as gun owners, we cannot sit still! Every member of the U.S. Senate needs to hear from gun owners to let them know that we strongly oppose any so-called "compromise" gun legislation offered by Sen. McCain, and we want them to vigorously oppose this provision -- or any other anti-gun proposal. Please contact your Senators at once so we can stop this anti-gun McCain legislation! You can call your Senators at 1-877-762-8762 (toll free) or at 202-224-3121. To identify your Senators, as well as to send a message via e-mail, see the Legislative Action Center at http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm on the GOA website. Note: some Senators have recently stopped accepting e-mail. These Senators should be contacted via fax or phone. ----- Pre-written message ----- Dear Senator: Please do not support any gun control "compromises" on the education bill, S. 1. As you may know, Senators Jack Reed (D-RI) and John McCain (R-AZ) may be offering competing versions of legislation restricting gun shows. I hope you will vote AGAINST both of these anti-gun proposals. The so-called "loopholes" that these Senators want to close are actually freedoms that are guaranteed under the Bill of Rights. Both proposals would virtually ban the private sales of firearms at gun shows, unless a buyer submits to a registration background check. It is outrageous that Senators in Washington, D.C., would even consider banning a constitutionally protected activity that law-abiding, consenting adults are peacefully engaging in. Both of these gun proposals could also drive gun shows out of business, as the liability for promoters would be immense -- they could land in jail for very technical violations of procedure. Senator Reed's proposal would track the provisions in his bill, S. 767. McCain's language has yet to be introduced. Nevertheless, I hope you will oppose either proposal, or any other anti-gun provision that is offered to the education bill. Please let me know what you intend to do. Sincerely, [your name] - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Bergeson" Subject: Gun control elitists fear the common people Date: 07 May 2001 14:38:12 -0600 Gun control elitists fear the common people ---------- by Charley Reese "Probably no subject generates more lies and deliberate distortions of the facts than gun control. It's easy to understand once you comprehend that the motivation is to disarm the common citizens of the United States." (05/03/01) http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/opinion/columnists/orl-opd-reese050301.column - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott Bergeson Subject: FW: GUN SHOW BAN BILLS !!! Date: 08 May 2001 11:15:11 -0600 ----- URGENT USSC ACTION ALERT May 7, 2001 - CALL SENATOR HATCH AND BENNETT TODAY TO STOP GUN REGISTRATION AND GUN SHOW BAN BILLS !!! With Bill Clinton out of the White House the anti-gunners believe that gun owners have let their guard down. They are using this perceived complacency to ram legislation through Congress to register guns, license gun owners, effectively ban gun shows, and/or mandate the use of gun locks. WE NEED YOU TO CALL SENATORS HATCH AND BENNETT AND TELL THEM TO OPPOSE THESE BILLS Bills come up in Congress all the time to ban guns, tax guns at 1000% etc. Most of these are sponsored by legislators attempting to look tough against the NRA and most do not have any chance of passage. This is not the case with the bills mentioned in this alert. THESE BILLS ARE SUPPORTED BY SOME BIG NAMES INCLUDING SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN AND THEY HAVE A VERY REAL CHANCE OF PASSAGE UNLESS ALL GUN OWNERS GET ON THE PHONE TODAY AND START MAKING PHONE CALLS! Some of these proposals would mandate a 5 day waiting period before you can purchase a gun at a gun show. Essentially this would end gun shows as we know them since they only last 2 days. You can also be sure that if such a proposal becomes law all firearm transfers, including lending your hunting rifle to a friend, will eventually require a background check and a 5 day waiting period. WHAT YOU NEED TO DO NOW: CALL SENATOR ORRIN HATCH AT 801-524-4380 OR BETTER YET HIS WASHINGTON D. C. NUMBER AT 202-224-5251 CALL SENATOR ROBERT BENNETT AT 801-524-5933 OR BETTER YET HIS WASHINGTON D.C. NUMBER AT 202-224-5444 TELL THEM TO OPPOSE SENATE BILL 767. THIS BILL WILL REQUIRE BACKGROUND CHECKS AT GUN SHOWS. ALSO TELL THEM TO OPPOSE ANY GUN SHOW LEGISLATION INCLUDING ANY COMPROMISE LEGISLATION BY SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN AND SENATOR JOSEPH LIEBERMAN. TELL THEM YOU WANT ABSOLUTELY NO GUN SHOW LEGISLATION PASSED. Both Senator Hatch and Bennett have been very supportive of gun rights. Senator Hatch was successfully able to keep similar legislation locked up in committee last year. However, it is important that they hear from you TODAY! This bill is being pushed by some high ranking Republicans and we need to make sure that Senators Hatch and Bennett hear from Utah gun owners instead of anti-gunners within their own party. As always be very polite when making these phone calls. IF YOU ARE NOT GOING TO MAKE THIS PHONE CALL RIGHT NOW THEN JOT DOWN THE ABOVE PHONE NUMBERS AND BE SURE TO DO IT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. BELOW IS AN ALERT FROM THE NRA THAT PROVIDES MORE DETAIL ON THE ISSUE KEEP PRESSURE UP ON U.S. SENATORS As we mentioned in last week's FAX Alert (/grassroots/20010427-AntiGunGroups-001.shtml) (and per the "Special" FAX Alert (/grassroots/20010501-GunShows-001.shtml) some of you in targeted states received on Tuesday), the anti-gunners are about to launch another attack on our Right to Keep and Bear Arms! As the U.S. Senate continues debate on education legislation, enemies of the Second Amendment are planning to hijack the education bill by offering anti-gun amendments --to register guns, license gun owners, effectively ban gun shows, and/or mandate the use of gun locks -- in another shameless attempt to exploit the recent anniversary of the tragedy at Columbine. Right now, the biggest threat to our rights is still S. 767, by anti-gun Senator Jack Reed (D-R.I.) S. 767 is Reed's version of the Lautenberg legislation that sought to end gun shows as we know them today. The original Lautenberg bill passed the Senate a few weeks after the Columbine attack by a vote of 51-50 -- with then-Vice President Al Gore casting the tie-breaking vote. We also expect that U.S. Senators John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.) will soon introduce their "compromise" gun show legislation. While this bill has not yet been introduced, we expect it will be an unworkable "middle ground" bill that will still provide for a waiting period on gun purchases of as long as five days, and will still allow the retention of records on gun purchases by law-abiding citizens. Your U.S. Senators still need to hear from you TODAY -- even if you have already contacted them on this issue -- in opposition to both S. 767 and the McCain-Lieberman gun show bill. Please continue to call, e-mail, and write your U.S. Senators today to urge them to oppose gun control amendments to the education bill! And be sure to spread the word and encourage your family, friends, and fellow firearm owners to do the same. Tell your Senators that registration and waiting periods that are longer than gun shows are unacceptable! You can find contact information for your federal lawmakers, and e-mail them directly, by using the "Write Your Reps" (Error! Bookmark not defined.) END OF NRA ALERT………………………… The Utah Shooting Sports Council normally deals with gun rights issues at the state level. However due to the serious nature of this pending federal legislation we are alerting you to this national threat. It is very important to stay up to date on federal issues. We suggest receiving alerts from the NRA or other national gun rights groups such as GOA. For more information on this issue visit the NRA at www.NRAILA.org. Help spread the word and protect your gun rights. Please forward this e-mail to anyone you think may be interested. Visit our web-site at www.UtahShootingSports.org for the latest news and membership applications. Thanks for your time. Provided by the Utah Shooting Sports Council, Box 1975, Layton, UT 84041-6975 To be removed from this mailing list click on the link below http://ugca.org/cgi-bin/plistussc/mail.cgi?jimdex@inconnect.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Bergeson" Subject: FW: LUFA Date: 08 May 2001 13:36:39 -0600 On Sun, 6 May 2001 12:14:42 -0600 Richard Partridge wrote: After visiting their web site, I'm sorry to report that LUFA, the Canadian gun owners organization headed by a former RCMP officer, has had their website locked up by court action. They can still be reached by link through their address www.lufa.ca . I strongly urge all the support we Americans can give them. -RLP - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott Bergeson Subject: FW: Danforth trusted FBI during Waco probe Date: 09 May 2001 15:02:39 -0600 Danforth trusted FBI during Waco probe ---------- Former Waco special counsel John Danforth relied heavily on the FBI for information during his investigation of the 1993 tragedy in Waco, Texas, even though his investigation was supposedly independent and the FBI was itself a target. (05/08/01) http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=22731 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Bergeson" Subject: FW: Use HCI's web form to send FREE fax to Congress Date: 09 May 2001 22:02:19 -0600 Here's a monkey wrenching type "project" seen on another list... ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- Reply to: fap@world.std.com http://www.capwiz.com/guncontrol/mail/compose/ Enter your zip code. Then modify the subject and body of the message and click the Fax radio buttons and fax away! - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: charles hardy Subject: FW: Boycott Bank of America Date: 11 May 2001 12:31:49 -0400 (EDT) I've made no attempt to verify this, so FWIW... ------Original Message------ Bank of America has now arbitrarily decided, like Citibank before it, that it will not provide merchant services to any firearm-related business. Citibank finally rescinded that stupid tyranny after half the people in this country raised hell and threatened to close their accounts and the same groundswell of opinion must be brought to bear against Bank of America. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: charles hardy Subject: Two Knife Attacks--A Contrast Date: 11 May 2001 13:25:52 -0400 (EDT) ------Original Message------ The Self Defense Files: Two Knife Attacks--A Contrast 05.11.01 When Kim Mariani was asked about a Walmart shopper who used her handgun to stop a knife-wielding assailant, the spokeswoman for Handgun Control, Inc. said, "[Using a gun] just escalates the situation, and a lot of times it's unnecessary." The case she was referring to occurred on May 23, 2000, in Spring Hill, Florida. A shoplifter attacked employees with a knife, slashing two of them before Sandra Suter pulled her licensed .40-caliber handgun and ended the assault. It turned out that Willie J. Redding, the assailant, had been released from jail the same day. He was a violent career criminal and drug addict who knew how to work the criminal justice system to his advantage. He'd been arrested for dozens of crimes, but had spent little time in jail. Many cops and Walmart employees called Suter a heroine, stating that she saved others from being injured in the knife attack. HCI, of course, disagreed. Their statements implied that Suter should not have become involved. The grandmother should have allowed Redding to continue his attack on the unarmed employees. What would have happened had Suter not intervened? We get an idea from an incident that occurred a year later. On Sunday, May 13, 2001, a similar attack occurred, this one in Lexington, Kentucky. Unfortunately, in this case, none of the employees or customers were armed, leading the assailant to escalate his attack until as many as eight people were injured. At midnight, Jorge Soto Luke, a drug addict with a history of mental illness, walked out of the Lexington Walmart. When he did, a buzzer went off, indicating that he was carrying goods he hadn't paid for. Aswana Waddy, a cashier, yelled for Luke to stop. Even though he kept going, Luke was not followed by other employees. But fifteen minutes later, he returned. He walked into the store, and rushed straight toward Waddy. Luke punched the cashier, knocking her to the floor. Then he pulled out a knife and began stabbing her. Waddy was stabbed in the shoulder, back, and head. After the assault, she was taken to Kentucky Medical Center where she was listed in fair condition. When two customers attempted to intervene in the attack on Waddy, they were also stabbed. Store employees Katie Fennel and Deborah Porter rushed to the aid of their fellow-employee but they were met by the enraged Luke and repeatedly stabbed. As three employees lay on the floor bleeding from wounds inflicted by Luke, still another employee, a female, attempted to pull Waddy away from the attacker. Luke was having none of it--he stabbed the employee in the shoulder and slashed her face. After a rampage that lasted nearly ten minutes, Luke was finally subdued by several male employees. Police soon arrived. Investigators stated that they were looking for at least two other customers who fled the store after being attacked by Luke. In all, as many as eight customers and employees had been knifed by the crazed assailant. The victims were taken to area hospitals. All except Waddy were released within 24 hours. Her injuries were severe enough to require surgery and an extensive stay in the hospital. The police investigation revealed that Luke was a crack addict with a history of mental illness. Had a Sandra Suter been in the store, the assault might have ended quickly. It might not have escalated to the point that eight people were injured. The contrast is unmistakeable. Without a firearm, the attack in Lexington seemed to go on forever. Each heroic employee or customer who attempted to stop the assailant was stabbed, leaving the floor littered with bleeding victims. On the other hand, the Spring Hill assailant looked down the barrel of a handgun and quickly lost his aggressive tendencies. In retrospect, Sandra Suter almost certainly saved others from injury or even death. According to a recent report, in the wake of the Lexington attack, Walmart is reviewing its security policies. Letting employees carry concealed weapons might be a start. ------ Robert A. Waters is author of The Best Defense: True Stories of Intended Victims Who Defended Themselves with Firearms, Cumberland House Publishing, Inc., 1998. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: charles hardy Subject: Fw: Re: [LPUtah] FW: Boycott Bank of America Date: 11 May 2001 22:37:20 -0600 The following was received from BoA. You'll forgive me for being cynical, but after 8 years of Clinton-speak, I now parse things a little more carefully. Somehow, I'm guessing that "no **corporate-wide** policy" and "some confusion" really means something like, "We encouraged a few local branches to implement this policy to see if we could get away with it while still being able to claim it was all just a mistake if it started looking like we might get burned." Lacking a VERY rapid, full explanation affirming their support for gun businesses (big, small, independant, etc, not just the KMart's and Walmarts who do a small fraction of their business in gun stuff, but full out gun stores) I think the advice in the second forward is well worth heading. We've got some great local financial institutions that, in my experience, give far better customer service, lower fees, and pay higher interest, than do the big national chains anyway. Just my $.02 worth... ---------------- Charles Hardy ====forwarded article 1======= Sent: Friday, May 11, 2001 1:10 PM > Dear Mr. xxxx, > > Thank you for your inquiry to Bank of America. > > At Bank of America, we do not have a company-wide policy preventing us > from doing business with firearms dealers. There has been some confusion > regarding this issue, which we are addressing. > > Regards, > > Bank of America > ======forwarded post 2========== Yeah, I saw that one. I was thinking that it's time we stop messing around with these people. If the people at Bank of America were too stupid to learn from what happened to Citibank and Smith & Wesson, the company deserves to take some major damage. Everybody who owns a gun should not just write letters and threaten to withdraw their accounts. They should write letters AFTER they do so telling the bank why they did so. Bank of America must die. This is war, plain and simple, and they chose the wrong side. We're the side that believes in application of sufficient force to stop the threat, and it appears to me that the only way to convince these guys we're serious is to hurt them very badly, mortally if possible. Still plenty of banks out there to do business with. There is no need for anyone who believes in gun rights to do business with this particular one ever again. Nor accept checks drawn on their accounts, if you're in a position to do that. None too bright, those lads. If we'd do serious damage to Smith & Wesson, a company that we formerly liked and respected for many years, what do they think we're going to do to a despised national bank chain (which covers all of them, of course). Hmmmn. I think I can see my next article forming up already. ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Bergeson" Subject: FW: LP reports National Review article - 5% solution strikes back Date: 14 May 2001 11:46:20 -0600 ----- http://www.lp.org/lpnews/0105/natreview.html I had missed this, but the National Review in both their online and print editions reported 2 senate races and 2 house races where the republican lost by a margin greater than the votes taken by the LP candidate. According to this article the republican leadership is quite worried by this. As one might imagine, my sympathy is less than abundant. Especially since one of the issues the analysts quoted in the article says is drawing people away from the republicans is gun rights. The less-than-horrific news just continues to roll in... --- Hunter's Ninety-Seventh Rule: Be careful never to offend people with your style or tone. Use facts. Ceterum censeo fiscum delendum esse --- >= LIBERTY ROUND TABLE DISCUSSIONS LIST (http://www.vader.com/lrtdiscuss) >= >= TO POST TO THE LIST: send mail to lrt-discuss@vader.com >= TO SUBSCRIBE TO LIST: send mail to lrt-discuss-request@vader.com >= TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM LIST: send mail to lrt-discuss-drop@vader.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Bergeson" Subject: Re: FW: LP reports National Review article - 5% solution strikes back Date: 14 May 2001 12:40:28 -0600 CABONSALL@aol.com wrote: >Wouldn't this mean that the Libertarian opposition had no effect on the >outcome? This would suggest that if all Libertarian votes had been cast for >the Republican the Republican still would have lost. If the Republicans had >lost by less than the Libertarian vote then that would indicate the >Libertarian vote may have made the difference. - Or am I missing something? >Charlie Ward Griffiths points out that Hunter mistyped. Scott ----- hunter@mva.net wrote: >http://www.lp.org/lpnews/0105/natreview.html >I had missed this, but the National Review in both their online and print >editions reported 2 senate races and 2 house races where the republican >lost by a margin greater than the votes taken by the LP candidate. I _think_ you meant _less than_. Since if the Republican lost by a margin greater than that taken by the Libertarian candidate, it's as though there wasn't a Libertarian candidate -- the Democrat got more votes than both combined. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: charles hardy Subject: FW: Gun Control and Crime Control Date: 14 May 2001 19:55:11 -0400 (EDT) Some links to lots of reading material... ------Original Message------ Here are hotlinks to some of the best and most recent research on gun control and crime control from the nation's leading think tanks. Gun Control and Crime Control Public Health and Gun Control Miguel A. Faria, Jr., MD Association of American Physicians and Surgeons Spring 2001, 3pp. Request document #1328102 http://www.heartland.org/PDF/13281b.pdf Firearm Registration & the Slippery Slope in Canada Gary Mauser Fraser Institute, March 2001, 3pp. Request document #1328103 http://www.heartland.org/PDF/13281c.pdf The Gun Show Loophole H. Sterling Burnett National Center for Policy Analysis February 2001, 2pp. Request document #1328101 http://www.heartland.org/PDF/13281a.pdf Texas Exile: Gun Crime Means Hard Time Hon. John Cornyn (Attorney General, Texas) Texas Public Policy Foundation Fall, 2000 Texas Public Policy Foundation Request document #1328134 http://www.heartland.org/PDF/1328bh.pdf --------------------------- These four documents available as PDF files on Heartland's Web site or by fax from PolicyFax represent the best, most current thinking on the subject, and just a few of the 7,000 documents from 300 organizations available through Heartland. You will need Adoble Acrobat Reader software--a free and easy-to-use program--to access these files. It is available at http://www.adobe.com/prodindex/acrobat/readstep.html#reader. (AOL users must paste the URL into the keyword or browser window.) - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: charles hardy Subject: Utah State Constitution documents Date: 14 May 2001 20:19:26 -0400 (EDT) FWIW, I recently went looking for a single, electronic version of the current Utah State Constitution. I was not able to find one, so I went ahead and created one from the web pages at the state legislative site. I now have the document in 3 formats: 1-MS Word 2000 with a full table of contents listing each article and section. 2-An HTML format which is just the MS Word 2000 auto convert. The table of contents converted to links to the referenced section. 3-An iSilo version for handheld Palm type devices. This was an auto convert from the previous HTML format and is a single, LONG page with the links intact. iSilo is required to read this version. If anyone would like a copy of these, either for their own use or to put on a web page somewhere, let me know and I'll email them to you. I believe they are accurate, but if anyone is willing to look them over and make sure I've not missed any sections (some section numbers look to be unused on the State web page) that would be great. The files are large, 380KB, 600KB, and 51KB, respectively for the 3 formats. The MS doc is 52 pages including about 6 pages for the table of contents. Due to the size, I will not post any of the files to the list. Let me know individually if you'd like one or if you happen to know of a nicely formatted version somewhere on the web already. Thanks. Charles. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Bergeson" Subject: SUPPORT H.R.1762 - Second Amendment Protection Act Date: 15 May 2001 11:19:20 -0600 SUPPORT H.R.1762 - Second Amendment Protection Act Rep. Ron Paul of Texas has introduced H.R.1762 "To restore the Second Amendment rights of all Americans." This proposal would: 1) Repeal the Brady Handgun Control Act and waiting periods; 2) Repeal the semi-auto assault weapon and high capacity magazine bans; and 3) eliminate the language allowing the BATF to ban guns "not suitable for sporting purposes". This bill has been referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. Contact the members of the committee to support this bill! http://capwiz.com/kba/dbq/officials/directory/directory.dbq?command=congdir Also, this bill has no cosponsors. Contact your U.S. Representative to cosponsor this bill! http://capwiz.com/kba/dbq/officials Read the text of the bill here: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:H.R.1762: Second Amendment Protection Act of 2001 (Introduced in the House) HR 1762 IH 107th CONGRESS 1st Session H. R. 1762 To restore the second amendment rights of all Americans. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES May 8, 2001 Mr. PAUL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary A BILL To restore the second amendment rights of all Americans. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the `Second Amendment Protection Act of 2001'. SEC. 2. REPEAL OF FEDERAL HARASSMENT PERIOD. Public Law 103-159 is hereby replaced, and any provisions of law amended or repealed by such Act are restored or revived as if such Act had not been enacted. SEC. 3. REPEAL OF UNCONSTITUTIONAL GUN BAN. Title XI of Public Law 103-322 is hereby repealed, and any provisions of law amended or repealed by such title are restored or revived as if such title had not been enacted. SEC. 4. REPEAL OF UNCONSTITUTIONAL DISTINCTION. (a) Section 201 of title 11 of Public Law 90-618 is amended by striking `which the Secretary finds is generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes,' and `which the owner intends to use solely for sporting purposes.' (b) Public Law 90-351, as amended, is amended as follows: (1) In section 902, strike `which the Secretary finds is generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes,' `which the owner intends to use solely for sporting, recreational, or cultural purposes,' `a projectile which the Secretary finds is primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes,' `devoted to the collection, competitive use, or other sporting use of firearms in the community,' `determined by the Secretary of the Treasury to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes and,' `(A) determined by the Secretary to be generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes, or determined by the Department of Defense to be a type of firearm normally classified as a war souvenir, and (B),' `and is generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes,' and `provided that such handguns are generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes,'. (2) Strike `lawful sporting purposes' and insert in lieu thereof `lawful purposes'. SEC. 5. EFFECTIVE DATE. The provisions of this Act shall take effect immediately upon enactment. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: charles hardy Subject: FWD: [LPUtah] Million Marxist Moms Date: 15 May 2001 19:19:24 -0400 (EDT) An interesting view behind the scenes into what you see on TV when it comes to our RKBA... ------Original Message------ Million Marxist Moms in Escondido, California - less than 150 in attendance I went to Escondido yesterday, I met up with the TRT/SAS-AIM along with many unaffiliated, yet concerned citizens, and we protested outside one of the Many Marxist Moms rallies. The Commie Mommies pretended not to see our signs, and some were very hostile. This was to be the crown jewel for the MMM as it was their main event in Southern California, yet they were only able to draw less than 150 people (my final head count was 141). If they can only draw 141 in Southern California, that would explain why they have gone into hiding in Michigan. The Counter-Protest was somewhere between 30 and 50 people, it was hard to keep track as we were spread pretty thin. We had folks on the street in front of the Park, as well as in front of the main entrance of the amphitheater. We had some American flags, Gadsden flags, I had my bullet riddled UN flag with a red circle and a slash painted through it along with whole bunch of signs. The "March" lasted from 1:00-2:00pm. I broadcast my Internet radio show for the first 40 minutes (would have been an hour had the battery on my cell phone not given up the ghost) from inside the amphitheater. I had made up a bogus press pass on my computer, so they foolishly let me in (it was kinda like the rancher letting the wolf into his pasture full of sheep). They has "information packages" that they were giving out to the press, but they refused to give on to me, because I was "pro-gun media." I wandered about inside conducting impromptu interviews with some of the cattle inside. One of them was a school teacher and when I posed questions to her that she didn't like (logical questions to her emotional outbursts) she got so flummoxed I thought she was gong to hit me! At that point someone snitched on me, and for the rest of my stay inside the amphitheater I was shadowed by one of Escondido's finest. At about 20 minutes passed 1:00 I saw the wheels of propaganda in motion. All of the camera crews up to this point has been idle, and not shot any footage. When the Head Communist for the San Diego Chapter moved to the podium (I thought that the speeches were about to begin). She asked everyone to converge on the center section on seats. You see the amphitheater seating is semicircular in design, and since the theater will hold roughly 800-900 people it looked rather empty. As soon as the sheep were herded into the center column of seats the cameras set up, and took very tight shots of the "crowd" to make it look like their were more people than there were. One the evening news most of the networks used the term "hundreds of supporters" while we the pro-gun folk were "a handful of protesters." When the propaganda speeches finally began it took them less than 30 seconds to bring out the lies about "gun deaths". Remember last year when their favorite stat was that "13 kids die every day? Well this year, they pared it down to 10, since we showed that it was a lie. HCI considers a 25 year old gangbanger who is shot by the police during the commission of a crime to be a child for use in the previously mentioned statistic. They seem to have a hard time keeping their story straight. In one speech, they drag out the tired old stat about 10 kids per day, and 3 minutes later thay claim that 81 kids died last year in California due to guns.......hmmmm. Something doesn't add up. First they say that 10 kids per day nationwide die every day, but only 81 in California (the sate with the highest population). Boy, they must be dropping like flies in South Dakota. The "news" crews eventually made their way over to the TRT/SAS-AIM folks, to get some footage of them, and some short interviews. I gave about 4 minutes to KSWB, another pro-gunner gave about the same amount to the local FOX affiliate, all of which ended up on the cutting room floor. I watched KSWB that night (I am just a little vain, I wanted to see my ugly mug on TV), and counted the amount of time they gave to each side of the issue. 58 seconds to the MMM, and 7 seconds to the TRT/SAS-AIM. Tell me they don't have an agenda. The entire protest was relatively peaceful, (aside from me mooing and baaaaing at the herd inside) until the end, when the police left, one of the MMM supporters (who turned out to be a 16 year old kid) drove up in his Toyota 4Runner and hollered out his window that the Second Amendment was written during a time of war, and was out dated. Time of war?!? I guess he is just a shinning example of why we need to get the government out of the education business. He then flipped the "bird," you know... the bad finger, drove off erratically speeding through the parking lot, and attempted to run over one of the TRTers, swerving away with only inches to spare. The little jerk and his sidekick were stopped by police a few minutes later when one TRT flagged down a cop, but they only got a written warning and a stern look. I wonder what would have happened if I pretended to run some of those moms down, I think I would be in jail right now, and rightfully so. The police were immediately hostile to the TRT people who were intent on pressing assault charges, but Lt. Coleman, and Sgt. Christensen of the Escondido Police Department refused to do their job, and they let the little felon go with absolutely no consequences for his actions aside from having a finger waved in his direction with a police officer behind it saying, "no, no, no, running people over is bad...naughty, naughty." The driver's excuse for driving the way he did, was that he was trying to escape a confrontation...Liar. He was the one who stopped to harass and harangue the TRTers. We were standing in the parking lot more than 30 feet away from his vehicle (which outweighed the TRTers by more than 3,000 lbs). God Help this Republic. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott Bergeson Subject: FW: The Parable of the Sheeple Date: 15 May 2001 17:32:30 -0600 The Parable of the Sheeple by Charles Riggs [w/edits] Not so long ago and in a pasture too uncomfortably close to here, a flock of sheeple lived and grazed. They were protected by a large, fighter dog, who answered to the shepherd, but despite his best lone efforts from time to time a nearby large pack of wolves would successfully prey upon outer fringes of the flock. One day a group of sheeple, bolder than the rest, met to discuss their dilemma. 'Our dog is good, and vigilant, but he is one and the wolves are many. The wolves he catches are not always killed, and the shepherd judges and releases many to prey again upon us, for no reason we can understand. What can we do? We are sheep, but we do not wish to be food, too!' One sheeple spoke up, saying 'It is his fangs and claws that make the wolf so terrible to us. It is his nature to prey, and he would find any way to do it, but it is the tools he wields that make it possible. If we had such fangs and claws, we could fight back and stop this savagery.' The other sheeple clamored in agreement. They went together to the old bones of the dead wolves heaped in the corner of the pasture where they gathered fangs and claws, sharpened them and turned them into very effective weapons. That night, when the wolves came, the newly armed sheeple sprang up with their newly-acquired weapons and struck at the wolves, crying, 'Be Gone! We are not food!' They drove off the invading, hungry wolves leaving them most astonished! "When did sheeple become so bold and so dangerous?" the wolves wondered. "When did sheeple grow fangs?" It was unthinkable! The next day, flush with victory and waving their weapons, the armed sheeple approached the flock to pronounce their discovery. But as they drew nigh, the flock huddled together and cried out, 'Baaaaaaaadddd! Baaaaaddd things! You have bad things! We are afraid! You are not sheeple!' The brave sheeple stopped, amazed. 'But we are your brethren!' they cried. 'We are still sheeple, but we do not wish to be food. See, our new fangs and claws protect us and have saved us from slaughter. They do not make us into wolves, they make us equal to the wolves, and safe from being eaten!' 'Baaaaaaad!' cried the flock, 'the things are bad and will pervert you, and we fear them. You cannot bring them into the flock!' So the armed sheeple talked no more about their weapons, for they had no desire to panic the flock and wished to remain in the fold. But they resolved somehow never to return to those nights of terror, waiting for the wolves to eat them. Beaten back, time and again with weapons of their own kind, in time the wolves attacked less often and sought easier prey. They had no stomach for fighting sheeple possessing fangs and claws like theirs. Not knowing which sheeple had fangs and which did not, they came to leave sheeple out of their diet almost completely, except for the occasional raid from which more than one wolf did not return. Then came the day when, as the flock grazed beside a stream, one sheeple's weapon slipped from the folds of her fleece. A cry of alarm went out from the flock -- in terror once again, 'Baaaaaad! You still possess these evil things! We must ban you from our presence!' And so they did. The great chief sheeple and his council, encouraged by the words of their advisors, placed signs and totems at the edges of the pasture forbidding the presence of hidden weapons there. The armed sheeple protested before the council, saying, 'It is our pasture, too, and we have never harmed you! When can you say we have caused you hurt? It is the wolves, not we, who prey upon you. We are still sheeple, but we will not be food!' But the flock drowned them out with cries of 'Baaaaaaddd! We will not hear your clever words! You and your things are evil and will harm us!' Saddened by this rejection, the armed sheeple moved off. They spent their days following the flock, trying from time to time to speak with their brethren, to convince them of the wisdom of having such fangs, but met with little success. They found it hard to talk to those who, upon hearing their words, would roll back their eyes and flee, crying 'Baaaaddd! Bad Things!' The wolves kept up with the latest status of the sheeple through spies placed in and around their pastures. They decided to implement a false plan of appeasement and avoid attacks until a new and more successful strategy was developed. The Council of the Sheeple, noticing the greatly diminished incident of attacks by wolves, and having such great fear of the "baaaaad things,' decided it would better serve the peaceful purposes of the flock to require that those in possession of such 'baaaaad things' sign a list of ownership for identification purposes. This list helped the Council gain better control of who owned what whenever any of the 'baaaaaad things' got stolen or misplaced. However, many of the sheeple -- who greatly feared the wolves -- refused to sign. Consequently, they hid their "baaaad things" from the rest of the flock by burying them underground. Meanwhile, the wolves, still wounded from their prior foiled attacks, temporarily lost interest in the sheeple. They hunted and attacked easier prey elsewhere. As a result, the Council, desiring to further the resultant peace, passed a law -- disregarding the objections of many -- that all 'baaaad things' be stored in cases with locks to prevent little lambs from playing with them, and thereby, getting hurt. Consequently, those who refused to rely entirely on the shepherd and dog for their safety, insisted on their right of self-defense by maintaining the hiding of their "baaaad things" underground from the rest of the flock. That night, the wolves visited the sheeple's totems and saw their signs. They exclaimed, "Truly, these sheeple are foolish, easy prey! Brothers, let us feed!" They set upon the flock, and horrible was the carnage in the midst of the fold. The dog fought like a demon, and often seemed to be in two places at once, but even he could not avoid harm nor halt the ensuing slaughter. It was only after some of the sheeple (though wounded and bloodied in the fight) -- at the peak of the battle, when all seemed lost -- successfully retrieved their buried, locked fangs and claws, and, thus, succeeded in warding off the hungry, invading wolves, causing them to flee. However, some of the surviving sheeple reported to the Council that most unfortunately some of their brethren had been wounded, and in one instance, accidentally killed by armed sheeple in the battle. So, in the morning, when the armed sheeple spoke to the flock, and said, "See? If the wolves know you have no fangs, they will fall upon you. Why be prey? To be a sheep does not mean to be food for wolves,' the rest of the flock cried out more feebly (for their voices were fewer, though with no less terror), 'Baaaaaaaad! These things are bad! If they were banished, we would be less likely to be harmed! Baaaaaaad!' So the Council, at the urging of the remaining frightened flock, banned all fangs and claws, imposing severe penalties on anyone found in possession of same. All the while, the blood-thirsty, snarling, vicious and drooling wolves remained on the edge of the pasture secretly waiting for the next time they could attack. The ravenous wolves knew that since the sheeple were peaceloving in nature and lacking in survival prowess (being demonstrably prone to foolishness), they would be so again. This they did, and still do. In contrast, the armed sheeple -- having resolved to conceal their ever- ready, sharpened weapons from the remaining view-sensitive flock at all costs -- endured their fellow brethren's resultant fear and loathing. They even resolved to protect their brethren should ever the need arise, until the day the flock learned to understand that as long as there were hungry, ravenous wolves waiting to attack in the night, sheeple would need sharp fangs and long claws to repel them. The armed sheeple would still be sheeple, but -- unlike their wolf-eaten brethren -- they would not become food! ---------------------- "The beauty of the Second Amendment (right to bear arms) is that it will not be needed until they try to take it." Thomas Jefferson ---------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott Bergeson Subject: Gun-control elitists hate, fear common people Date: 15 May 2001 17:32:56 -0600 Gun-control elitists hate, fear common people Charley Reese May 3, 2001 http://www.orlandosentinel.com/templates/misc/printstory.jsp?slug=orl%2Dopd%2Dreese050301 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: charles hardy Subject: FWD: SUPPORT H.R.1762 - Second Amendment Protection Act Date: 15 May 2001 19:43:14 -0400 (EDT) Our delegation (or at least those who claim to be pro-gun) should probably be encouraged to co-sponsor this one... ------Original Message------ SUPPORT H.R.1762 - Second Amendment Protection Act Rep. Ron Paul of Texas has introduced H.R.1762 "To restore the Second Amendment rights of all Americans." This proposal would: 1) Repeal the Brady Handgun Control Act and waiting periods; 2) Repeal the semi-auto assault weapon and high capacity magazine bans; and 3) eliminate the language allowing the BATF to ban guns "not suitable for sporting purposes". This bill has been referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. Contact the members of the committee to support this bill! http://capwiz.com/kba/dbq/officials/directory/directory.dbq?command=congdir Also, this bill has no cosponsors. Contact your U.S. Representative to cosponsor this bill! http://capwiz.com/kba/dbq/officials Read the text of the bill here: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:H.R.1762: Second Amendment Protection Act of 2001 (Introduced in the House) HR 1762 IH 107th CONGRESS 1st Session H. R. 1762 To restore the second amendment rights of all Americans. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES May 8, 2001 Mr. PAUL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary A BILL To restore the second amendment rights of all Americans. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the `Second Amendment Protection Act of 2001'. SEC. 2. REPEAL OF FEDERAL HARASSMENT PERIOD. Public Law 103-159 is hereby replaced, and any provisions of law amended or repealed by such Act are restored or revived as if such Act had not been enacted. SEC. 3. REPEAL OF UNCONSTITUTIONAL GUN BAN. Title XI of Public Law 103-322 is hereby repealed, and any provisions of law amended or repealed by such title are restored or revived as if such title had not been enacted. SEC. 4. REPEAL OF UNCONSTITUTIONAL DISTINCTION. (a) Section 201 of title 11 of Public Law 90-618 is amended by striking `which the Secretary finds is generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes,' and `which the owner intends to use solely for sporting purposes.' (b) Public Law 90-351, as amended, is amended as follows: (1) In section 902, strike `which the Secretary finds is generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes,' `which the owner intends to use solely for sporting, recreational, or cultural purposes,' `a projectile which the Secretary finds is primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes,' `devoted to the collection, competitive use, or other sporting use of firearms in the community,' `determined by the Secretary of the Treasury to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes and,' `(A) determined by the Secretary to be generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes, or determined by the Department of Defense to be a type of firearm normally classified as a war souvenir, and (B),' `and is generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes,' and `provided that such handguns are generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes,'. (2) Strike `lawful sporting purposes' and insert in lieu thereof `lawful purposes'. SEC. 5. EFFECTIVE DATE. The provisions of this Act shall take effect immediately upon enactment. - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Bergeson" Subject: FW: BUSH'S GUN CONTROL PROPOSAL Date: 15 May 2001 19:23:04 -0600 BUSH'S GUN CONTROL PROPOSAL http://www.deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,270018918,00.html? Monday, May 14, 2001 BUSH RENEWS CALL TO END GUN CRIMES Utah Gun Owners Alliance comments: If gun control has such overwhelming support in Utah, why did the Million Moms, with their huge bankroll, fawning media coverage, and national organization, only manage to get 100 people to show up for their "march"? The pro-gun side, with no funding, organization, or media support had at least as many (our reports say quite a few more), despite the fact that most Utah gun rights organizations, including UTGOA, declined to participate. As for Bush's proposal, we note that specific details are not yet available. But based on the information that is available, we consider President Bush a MUCH greater threat to gun rights than the misguided moms. And we unequivocally OPPOSE the egregiously misnamed "Project Safe Neighborhoods", which should be called "Project Gestapo". Here's why: The federal government has no business getting involved in local crime. It's a local issue, best handled by the state. Federalizing gun control means that Utah will soon be subject to the kind of tyrannical laws that have ruined California, New York, Massachusetts, Maryland and the District of Columbia. And this type of federalization can only further damage state sovereignty. And while "If you use a gun illegally, you will do hard time" sounds good, the reality is terrifying - because the target isn't violent criminals - the target is ordinary gun owners like us. There are already laws against violent crime. These laws are already enforced, in the sense that prosecutors are not declining to prosecute murderers, rapists, and other violent criminals. (We would argue for better enforcement of sentencing, but that's not the issue here.) So what's really being proposed? Enforcement of all of the stupid, unconstitutional, laws against gun owners - not criminals. In other words, we'll be spending millions of dollars to send gun owners to federal prison for possession of politically incorrect guns - guns that are too powerful, too big, too small, hold too many bullets, or look "scary" to Dianne Feinstein. We'll send people to federal prison for driving within 1000 feet of a school with a hunting rifle, or for accidentally carrying a firearm into a post office, or for committing a clerical error on a form. Note also that this proposal will do nothing about criminals who use knives, lead pipes, fists, or other weapons. The focus is on guns, not on crime. In other words, Project Gestapo says that a person who puts a flash suppressor on his rifle is more of a threat to society than a serial rapist who disfigures his victims with a razor blade. And Bush is going to measure the success of this program by counting "gun crimes". So if overall crime skyrockets, but "gun crimes" decrease, Bush will consider this a great success. We suspect the victims won't. Then there's ballistics testing - a complete waste of money, since anyone can change the ballistic fingerprint of a firearm with a nail file. The only thing ballistics testing does is increase the cost of a firearm, unless it ends up being a de facto gun ban as is the case in Maryland. "Project Safe Neighborhoods", in other words, will make our neighborhoods safe only for criminals. By disarming good citizens, it will make neighborhoods much less safe for the rest of us. "Project Safe Neighborhoods" is heavily modeled on the NRA's viciously anti-gun Project Exile. For more on this, see http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=720 Sadly, it looks like our Republican president may accomplish what liberals like the "Moms" have so far failed to do - increase gun control. Because both Republicans and the NRA will be supporting this expensive, abusive, and generally worthless program, it's going to be very difficult to stop. Please write to President Bush, Senators Hatch and Bennett, and your Congressman, and let them know you OPPOSE "Project Safe Neighborhoods" and consider it an anti-gun program. Tell them it's time to REPEAL abusive, unconstitutional gun laws - not ENFORCE them! You can write to all of these people by your zip code under "elected officials" [at] http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm Sample message: Dear _____________: I am writing to let you know that I object to "Project Safe Neighborhoods" and consider it to be a dangerously anti-gun program. Most of the thousands of gun laws on the books are unconstitutional and abusive - and do nothing to stop crime. There's no reason to send good people to do hard time in federal prison for non-violent technical "offenses". Crime is not a federal issue, either. It should be handled by local law enforcement and criminal justice systems, not by expanding a federal police state. If you're seriously interested in decreasing crime, stop letting violent criminals out of prison early - and start REPEALING all the laws that make it difficult or impossible for good people to defend their homes and families. I hope that you are not an anti-gun politician and that you will oppose "Project Safe Neighborhoods" Please write and let me know what you intend to do. Thank you. YOUR NAME YOUR ADDRESS Copyright 2001, Utah Gun Owners Alliance, Inc. and Sarah Thompson PO Box 1185 Sandy, UT 84091 801-566-1625 http://www.utgoa.org mailto:Director@utgoa.org PLEASE SUPPORT UTAH GUN OWNERS ALLIANCE! JOIN US TODAY! Did someone forward this to you? Please SUBSCRIBE NOW! That way you'll receive our FREE alerts as soon as they're released. During the legislative session, we send urgent, time limited alerts. Don't risk missing important information because someone else neglected to forward important information. Our alerts are low volume and average less than one alert per day. To subscribe to the UTGOA list, mailto:utgoa-subscribe@yahoogroups.com or use the form on our web site, http://www.utgoa.org. For more information, see http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/UTGOA. Utah Gun Owners Alliance is completely dependent on your generosity to cover our operating costs. Please consider joining us or sending a donation. Membership information is at: http://www.utgoa.org/pages/join.html Donations may be sent to: PO Box 1185, Sandy, UT 84091 Checks should be made payable to Utah Gun Owners Alliance, Inc. or UTGOA. Thank for your support! UTGOA is written and distributed by, Utah Gun Owners Alliance, Inc. http://www.utgoa.org, and Sarah Thompson, M.D. All information contained in these alerts is the responsibility of the author, unless otherwise attributed. Permission is granted for distribution of these alerts so long as no changes are made, UTGOA is clearly credited, and this message is left intact. Archives of the UTGOA alerts can be found at: http://www.utgoa.org/cgi-bin/alerts Utah Gun Owners Alliance, Inc. is a Utah non-profit corporation. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott Bergeson Subject: Gambling With your Life: Is 911 an acceptable option? Date: 16 May 2001 16:23:30 -0600 Gambling With your Life: Is 911 an acceptable option? http://www.sierratimes.com/archive/files/may/16/gedan051601.htm - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Bergeson" Subject: Dalai Lama comments on self defense Date: 17 May 2001 11:24:39 -0600 "If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun." ~~ The Dalai Lama, (May 15, 2001, The Seattle Times) speaking at the "Educating Heart Summit" in Portland, Oregon, when asked by a girl how to react when a shooter takes aim at a classmate. http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis/web/vortex/display?slug=dalai15m0&date=20010515 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: charles hardy Subject: FWD: Dalai Lama comments on self defense Date: 17 May 2001 13:47:05 -0400 (EDT) This is an interesting quote... ----forwarded message--- "If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun. Not at the head, where a fatal wound might result. But at some other body part, such as a leg." ~~ The Dalai Lama, (May 15, 2001, The Seattle Times) speaking at the "Educating Heart Summit" in Portland, Oregon, when asked by a girl how to react when a shooter takes aim at aclassmate. - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: charles hardy Subject: Political motivation Date: 17 May 2001 14:18:14 -0400 (EDT) We often hear politicians saying that political "threats" do not influence them. (And certainly we should never say or do ANYTHING that could be perceived as a threat. Simply letting politicians know that their vote on a given bill is very important to you is generally all that should be done.) But don't believe them for one second if they try to insinuate in any way, shape, or form, that they don't care about how their votes will affect their political future. Politicians live for job security in a way that makes your typical engineer look like a fanatical risk taker. And you don't have to take my word for it. They WILL admit the truth, in round about ways, when they think it serves their purposes. Check out the quote below from today's SLTrib article on Utah playing host to the NRA convention in 2007. As an asside, I should say that--excepting their gun safety and other training material--I have serious questions as to whether the NRA and USSC do more harm or good when it comes to guns. Also, the full article contains some factual errors concerning Utah's laws on open carry. Please do not commit a crime or get yourself shot by some nervous urban cop based on a reporters misunderstanding/misreporting or Utah's laws and/or misuse of words that have different meanings in their common vs their legal usage. Full article at: . Quote of interest showing that job security is the prime motivator for politicians. Make it clear (through election results, NOT threats) that voting the wrong way on your issue will cost them their seats, and politicians will stop voting against you--either because you've replaced them with someone else, or because they don't want to be replaced. Back room deals that allow politicians to vote against you, or to not vote at all, or claim they voted for you while also telling your foes that they voted for them are not necessary and are not effective. Here's the quote taken from near the bottom of the article: ========== Former state Rep. Dave Jones blames the NRA for the defeat of his bills that would have kept guns out of churches and schools, made gun owners liable for negligent storage and required background checks at gun shows. "Republicans are intimidated by NRA membership," Jones says. "A member of the Republican leadership told me that if he had voted for one of my bills, the NRA people in his district would run another candidate against him from his own party." ==== There you have it from the donkey's mouth. A very bad bill failed NOT because of back room deals, NOT because legislators phillosophically agree with us, NOT because we are nice people and they really like us, NOT because the hate anti-gunners and wanted to get even with them. It failed because elected officials believed (accurately in this case) that to vote for that bill would make their re-election VERY difficult. This is the single most important lesson we can learn and re-learn and remember. Charles Hardy - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: charles hardy Subject: A second lesson illustrated in NRA article Date: 17 May 2001 14:52:44 -0400 (EDT) There is a second important political lesson illustrated in the SLTrib story about the NRA coming to Utah. This one is "pick your battles wisely." From the article: "The Legislature jumped into the gun law fray in 1994 after Salt Lake City, West Valley City and Murray passed gun control ordinances that included waiting periods and background checks for gun buyers that went beyond federal and state requirements. Salt Lake City's ordinance was challenged, but a judge upheld the city's right to pass its own gun laws. "Rather than appeal, firearm devotees flocked to the Legislature. "In the final minutes of the 1994 legislative session, lawmakers appointed a weapons task force. The task force recommended that cities and towns be prohibited from passing ordinances stricter than state law. Lawmakers obliged the next year, wiping out tougher city gun ordinances. " Now, at the time, one may have said the pro-gun forces should have appealed the decision, that by failing to do so, they "abandoned the field to their enemies." Monday afternoon quaterbacking is easy, but I don't think it is a stretch to suggest that turning to the legislature was a better use of time and money and effort than pursuing the case via the courts. As a result of that battle choosen wisely, today we do not have to worry about what every city or county in the State might try to do with our RKBA. We have been able to concentrate efforts on the State and federal levels. Obviously, best opinions will vary as to which battles need to be fought and which can be let go. But, lacking infinate resources, it is clear that we cannot engage in every possible battle every year. Thus, we need to pick our battles wisely. Some must be waged to prevent major ills from taking effect. Others can and should be waged either bacause they can be won, or because even in losing we can gain strategic advantage (such as getting a clear vote that can then be used to expose bad politicians' ACTIONS despite their WORDS during campaign season and thus replacing them). But there will always be things that simply cannot be done with available resources. Charles Hardy - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: charles hardy Subject: FW: GOUtah! Alert #85 Date: 18 May 2001 13:20:27 -0400 (EDT) The latest from GOUtah... Please note the divergence of some elected officials' words and actions noted in the post. It is this kind of divergence we need to remember at election time. As importantly, we need to make sure our elected officials are reminded that we do and will remember their actions and ignore their words come next election. ==================== GOUtah! Gun Owners of Utah Utah's Uncompromising, Independent Gun Rights Network. No Compromise. No Retreat. No Surrender. Not Now. Not Ever. GOUtah! Website: http://www.goutah.org Free Subscription to GOUtah! e-mail Alerts: To subscribe, send a blank e-mail message to: goutah-subscribe@yahoogroups.com To unsubscribe, send a blank e-mail message to: goutah-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com To receive GOUtah! Alerts free of charge via fax, send a fax to: (801) 944-9937 (Note: Fax Alerts are sometimes transmitted late at night, so you' ll need a fax system that doesn't make your home telephone ring) ___________________________ GOUtah! Alert #85 - 18 May 2001 Today's Maxim of Liberty: "If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun. Not at the head, where a fatal wound might result. But at some other body part, such as a leg." -- The Dalai Lama, speaking at the "Educating Heart Summit" in Portland, Oregon, when asked by a girl how to react when a shooter takes aim at a classmate. (May 15, 2001, The Seattle Times) NRA TO HOLD 2007 ANNUAL MEETINGS IN UTAH The National Rifle Association announced it will hold their 2007 Annual Meeting in Salt Lake City, Utah. Salt Lake City, also site of the 1992 NRA Meetings, was selected based on location, suitable convention and exhibit facilities and state firearms laws. The annual event often draws 40,000 to 50,000 NRA members to the exhibit and member activities. NRA Annual Meetings are currently scheduled for Kansas City, Missouri in 2001, Reno, Nevada in 2002, Orlando, Florida in 2003, Pittsburgh in 2004, Houston in 2005 and Milwaukee in 2006. McCAIN AND LIEBERMAN INTRODUCE JOINT GUN CONTROL BILL IN U.S. SENATE Gun control advocates got a big boost recently when Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) joined with notoriously anti-gun Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.) to introduce a bill which would require background checks on all private party firearm transfers at gun shows where 75 r more guns are offered for sale. McCain's sudden defection for the ranks of firearms supporters seems to now be complete, with this legislation coming in the wake of his lending his name to the newest national anti-gun group, "Americans for Gun Safety" earlier this year. McCain's name is also being widely circulated as a possible presidential or vice presidential candidate on the Democratic ticket in 2004. Anti-gun groups hailed the new proposal, made all the more dangerous as it may be seen as a more moderate approach to the gun show background check issue, and has bi-partisan sponsorship. GOUtah! opposes any requirement for background checks on private party transfers (or any other lawful transfers for that matter) and encourages you to contact Utah's U.S. Senators Orrin Hatch and Robert Bennett to register your opposition to the McCain-Lieberman bill. FEDERAL SURVEY INDICATES WHERE CRIMINALS GET - AND DON'T GET - THEIR GUNS In the wake of continued calls for legislation to close the non-existent 'loophole' on private party transfers at gun shows, we think we should look into just where these criminals are getting their guns. We could ask some politicians, journalists, Mike Leavitt, Sarah Brady or some poor misinformed soccer mom, but instead we'll ask the people who would really know the answers to this question: violent career criminals currently serving time in Federal prisons for firearms crimes. According to a 1997 study titled "Federal Firearms Offenders 1992-1998," by John Scalia, commissioned and funded by the United States Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, the sources of these criminal's guns were identified as follows: 35.4% -- Family Member of Friend 15% -- Drug Dealer 15% -- Retail Store 9.1% -- Theft or Burglary 8.7% -- Black Market 4.2% -- Pawn Shop 3.4% -- Borrowed or Were Given a Gun 1.7% -- Flea Market 1.7% -- GUN SHOWS!!! 5.9% -- All Other Sources Combined Yep, recent Federal Justice Department research shows that something like one violent Federal criminal in every 60 got his or her weapon from a gun show. That's why it's so important for those Federal and State Government busybodies to plug this loophole to prevent of the torrent of guns flowing from gun shows into the hands of violent criminals. GOUTAH!'S GUN RIGHTS & WRONGS QUOTEWATCH Insightful reader feedback on a recent GOUtah! Alert... Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 1:27 PM "i hope whilst cleaning your shotgun that it blows up in your dumb american face!!!!!!!!!! all the best edd (Thanks for your very kind words, 'edd.' We at GOUtah! ALWAYS unload our shotguns before cleaning them, per standard firearms safety practices, but it never hurts to get a thoughtful and gentle gun safety reminder from compassionate and well-informed folks like yourself.) "I'm pleased that the NRA is satisfied with Utah's gun laws. We still have a few concerns though. For instance we could loosen up our concealed weapons permits. Look at Vermont, where there are no restrictions." -- Former Speaker of the House Rob Bishop (R-Brigham City), the current paid USSC lobbyist, as quoted in the Salt Lake Tribune, 17 May 2001 (GOUtah!'s political irony note: Rob Bishop of USSC, along with NRA lobbyist Brian Judy was one of the prime movers of the hostile amendment attached to HB 376 which limited the term of validity of an out of state CCW permit to only 60 days.) "It's a great compliment to our state. The NRA convention ranks right up there with the Olympics." -- Sen. Mike Waddoups (R-Taylorsville) as quoted in the Salt Lake Tribune, 17 May 2001. (GOUtah!'s political irony note: Sen. Mike Waddoups recently carried state legislation prohibiting Utah's nearly 40,000 responsible and peaceable CCW holders from entering any 2002 Olympic venue while in otherwise lawful possession of a firearm or other potential weapon.) (If you have a gun-rights quote you'd like to share, send it to us at GOUtah! along with its verifiable original source.) That concludes the GOUtah! Alert #85-18 May 2001. Copyright 2001 by GOUtah! All rights reserved. We hope this information will be of assistance to you in defending your firearms rights. Remember that getting this information is meaningless unless YOU ACT ON IT TODAY. If you just read it and dump it in the trash, your gun rights, and the gun rights of future generations go in the trash with it. Get involved, get active and get vocal! - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott Bergeson Subject: The End of the Million Moms Date: 18 May 2001 17:07:39 -0600 By Tanya Metaksa http://frontpagemag.com/columnists/metaksa/2001/metaksa05-16-01.htm - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: charles hardy Subject: Fw: LOTT TO DEBATE EHRLICH ON REASON.COM! (Starting THIS Monday) Date: 20 May 2001 12:21:10 -0600 ---------------- Charles Hardy --------- Forwarded message ---------- LOTT TO DEBATE EHRLICH ON REASON.COM! Do More Guns Mean Less Crime? Mike Alissi Reason Online malissi@r... John Lott and Robert Ehrlich square off next week in a Reason Online debate! Do "right-to-carry" laws lead to a reduction in violent crime as Yale research scholar, John R. Lott, argued in his 1998 book, More Guns, Less Crime? Robert Ehrlich, a professor of physics at George Mason University and author of Nine Crazy Ideas in Science: A Few May Even Be True, disagrees with Lott's interpretation of the data. He says concealed carry laws have probably had no effect on violent crime, one way or the other. Who's right? Decide for yourself next week as Lott and Ehrlich shoot it out in a Reason Online debate! Here's the schedule: Round 1 Monday, May 21: Robert Ehrlich makes his case Tuesday, May 22: John Lott responds Round 2 Wednesday, May 23: Ehrlich replies Thursday, May 24: Lott replies Each dispatch will be posted by 9:00 A.M. Eastern. Don't miss it! http://www.reason.com When women are disarmed, a rapist will never hear - Stop or I'll shoot! ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: charles hardy Subject: Biathletes need sponsors Date: 21 May 2001 14:41:22 -0400 (EDT) From today's DesNews: Biathletes feeling like unwanted stepchild=20 By Donna Kemp Spangler Deseret News staff writer With the 2002 Winter Games less than a year away, spon= sors are clamoring to have their corporate identity coupled with figure ska= ting and downhill skiing and snowboarding. But sponsors haven't exactly raced to the door of the = U.S. Biathlon Association, the national governing body for the sport that c= ombines cross-country skiing with rifle shooting. The USBA is strugg= ling financially and wondering publicly if the sport =97 one of the most po= pular winter sports elsewhere in the world =97 has any future in this cou= ntry. "We are the invisible Olympic sport," said Max Cobb, w= inter program director for the USBA. Cobb said it is no help that American biathletes have = never medaled in Olympic competition, and the athletes by and large compete= out of the television spotlight. The lack of corporate sponsors has left the USBA with = a $120,000 deficit, out of an annual budget of only $750,000. That money go= es to support about 10 national team members and 15 junior team me= mbers, as well as training camps and travel to competitions, mostly in Euro= pe. The USBA does have some longtime sponsors, including L= .L. Bean and Federal Ammunition. But biathlon officials had expected more corporate sponsors, given that the Games will be held in the= United States where they will garner a wealth of media publicity. But the = USBA has been faced with widespread disinterest from larger and middl= e-size companies. Now they are looking for anyone at all to step forward= with financial help, no matter how small. How bad has it been? They are still ecstatic over a $5,000 check that one f= an wrote to them following the recent World Cup competition at Soldier Holl= ow, the Olympic venue for cross-country skiing and biathlon, located= near Midway. "What we are looking for is the dribs and drabs," said= Jerry Kokesh, development director for the USBA. The problem may be rooted in the fact the USBA does no= t have a budget to aggressively market the sport to would-be sponsors. Its = budget is so small that almost every dime goes to helping the athletes tr= ain and get to competitions. The budget shortfall could force cutbacks in the junio= r programs that have been years in the making. In fact, hopes for a U.S. me= dal in biathlon rest not so much with the current national team and the 2002= Games as they do with the junior team and Olympic Games in 2006 and beyond= . "It is a very frustrating period for us," said S= teve Sands, executive director of USBA. "We've worked exceedingly hard to b= uild a good program. We want to keep the momentum going." Officials insist the shortfall will not impact the tea= m's preparations for the Winter Games. Sands said the USBA recognizes the W= inter Games are a golden opportunity for the USBA to expose Americans to= the sport, and that they might not have a chance like this until the Olymp= ics return to American soil, probably decades in the future. "The sad thing is, we are invisible," Sands said, "but= you get anyone to come out and watch an event and they say it's a great sp= ort." - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: charles hardy Subject: Shooting NEAR an out of State church Date: 21 May 2001 15:04:51 -0400 (EDT) I try not to get sucked into conspiracy therories, but all the recent cover= age about guns and churches is about to convince me to quite fighting and j= ust accept those theories. Needless to say, none of those reports bother t= o even ask--much less try to answer--the question of "what if someone had h= ad a gun and been able to put up real resistance." But this one takes the cake. A shooting NEAR a church in Tennesee is now n= ewsworthy for a local paper in Utah?!?!? From today's DesNews. Charles ------------- Worshippers in church; gunbattle in parking lot=20 MURFREESBORO, Tenn. (AP) =97 A gunbattle broke out in = a parking lot outside a church sanctuary as members worshipped inside. No o= ne was hurt. Police said shots were exchanged between men in two ca= rs outside Walter Hill Baptist Church on Sunday over a drug deal gone wrong= . None of the suspects is affiliated with the church. Rev. Murray Mathis was getting ready to begin his chil= dren's sermon when it happened. "I was kind of leaned over with the kids and I heard t= he thing go pow pow! Pow pow!" he told WSMV-TV of Nashville. One bullet hit the sanctuary's outer wall. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David Sagers" Subject: Attempted Murder at Brickyard Plaza Date: 22 May 2001 13:30:57 -0600 Hi Charles This morning on 570 KNRS radio the news reported that there was an = attempted murder at Brickyard Plaza. The report said something to the = effect that an argument broke out between a guy walking thru the parking = lot and a another guy in a parked car. The driver got out of the car and fired a shot at the pedestrian. The = report went on to say that several shop owners and other bystanders held = the shooter until police arrived. Hummm.... The shooter is armed and some bystanders held him until the = police arrive? Wonder how many of those shop owners and bystanders were = also armed with a CCP? I called 570 KNRS, 908-1300, and asked this same question, except the part = about the CCP. The news lady who wrote the story admitted that she didn't = ask, but would follow up and try to report the information this afternoon. Maybe they need some more polite calls asking for the complete story. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: charles hardy Subject: FWD: [LPUtah] FW: GUN SHOW BILL & PTA MATTERS Date: 24 May 2001 13:10:59 -0400 (EDT) The following is from the USSC. There is some good info here, but please note that they *STILL* consider Hatch to be "pro-gun." I would argue that he *may* be less anti-gun than some democrats, but even then you have to consider whether a wolf in sheep's clothing is really better than a known and visible enemy. Also, rather than just "get[ing] involved to help guide the PTA activities in your kids' schools" as the USSC urges, parents may want to seriously consider forming brand new, completely locally controlled "parent teacher organizations" so that no dues money goes to the nation PTA. Just my opinion. Charles ---------- GUN SHOW BILL & PTA MATTERS- These two issues deserve your careful scrutiny, and action. 1. The analysis of the "McCain-Lieberman" bill was not prepared by USSC, but clearly points out the dangers of this deceptive and totally unacceptable attack on law abiding gun owners. If the Senator from Vermont switches to the Democratic party, Republicans will lose all Committee chairmanships. Pro-gun Judiciary Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch will be replaced by an anti-gun Democrat. Passage of new gun control schemes, specifically gun show bans becomes highly likely. It is also questionable if President Bush will veto "moderate" gun control. It is especially important to ensure everyone understands exactly how extreme this bill really is. 2. A story in the Salt Lake Tribune highlights the growing unrest with the National Parent Teachers Association (PTA). You can help ensure your kids get a good education, free from the anti-gun agenda of an outside agency, if you are involved in your children's school activities. Please get involved to help guide the PTA activities in your kids' schools. GUN-SHOW BILL IS NOT WHAT THEY SAY Re: S. 890, The McCain-Lieberman Bill: "Gun Show Loophole Closing and Gun Law Enforcement Act of 2001." Mass media publicity on the newly proposed gun-show bill is grossly inaccurate. The bill has almost nothing to do with what you've probably heard so far. The so-called "gun-show loophole" headlines are a minor detail and basically obscure what the bill really does. I've just finished studying the eight pages of legalese. Here is it what it calls for: 1.Unprecedented federal control over gun shows nationwide - perfectly legal gun shows become strictly outlawed without prior federal approval, licensing and registration of each show; 2. Centralized federal licensing and registration of every gun-show promoter in the nation. 3. Centralized federal registration of every vendor - including non-gun vendors -- at any gun show in the country. In order for me to sell my BOOKS at a gun show I'll have to pre-register and prove who I am, or face arrest; a private individual looking to sell a single gun would be treated as a vendor under this law and must be registered even if the gun isn't sold; 4. Centralized federal registration of EVERY PERSON who attends a gun show in America, whether or not they make purchases of anything at all -- you won't be allowed in without registering; 5. Centralized collection of "any other information" on gun-show attendees, as determined solely by the Secretary of the Treasury; 6. Imprisonment for attending a gun show and failing to give up any information required by regulations of the Secretary of the Treasury; 7. Imprisonment of any gun-show promoter who fails to register a single vendor; 8. Imprisonment of gun-show promoters who cannot prove they notified every person attending a gun show of the new rules, and obtained from attendees any information the Secretary of the Treasury mandates by regulation; 9. Centralized collection of "any other information" the Secretary of the Treasury decides, by regulation, is necessary on vendors, attendees, and the gun show itself; 10. Submission by gun-show promoters of vendor registration logs a) 30 days before any gun show, and b) additional submission of updated vendor registration logs 72 hours before any gun show, and c) additional submission of vendor registration logs within five days of the close of any gun show, under penalty of arrest and imprisonment for non-compliance; 11. Identification of vendors only by use of federally approved photo ID that may include use of a social security number, electronically encoded data, or "biometric identifiers" such as fingerprint, voice print, retina scan, iris scan, or similar (as defined under 18 USC 1028(d)(2)); 12. Creation of a new license (in addition to a gun-show-promoter license), similar to FFLs, for individuals who want access to the NICS national background check system for facilitating gun-show sales for private citizens; 13. Regulations to be issued by the Secretary of the Treasury on the procedures, data collections, methods and implementation of the entire process to federally control gun shows, in addition to the requirements made by the proposed statute; such regulations will not be known, drafted or even suggested, until after the McCain-Lieberman law is enacted; 14. The proposed bill also puts pressure on state governments to make at least 95% of their law enforcement records for the past 30 years openly available to the federal government; and -- makes unlimited funds available for the states to comply with these federal goals; -- requires annual federal review of states' compliance; -- increases penalties (up to ten years imprisonment) for record-keeping violations; -- grants states permission to make even more restrictive requirements without being out of compliance with these new federal laws (and by implication, puts states that resist these rules in federal trouble); -- provides hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars for more law enforcement under numerous programs including project Exile and others; -- hires 200 more Federal BATF Agents; -- provides $10 million to the National Institute for Justice to give out for research on "technologies that limit the use of a gun to the owner"; and -- provides for annual reports (in great detail) by the Attorney General to Congress on whether the Brady law is working; 15. Enlargement of the federal bureaucracy and appropriation from taxpayers of "such funds as are necessary" to license, register and monitor an estimated ten million non-criminals who attend the thousands of gun shows held annually in America; and 16. Oh yes, I almost forgot about the so-called "loophole" part the media is so excited about -- the McCain-Lieberman bill will make an honest private citizen a criminal for transferring a gun to another honest private citizen, without first registering the transfer with, and getting permission from, the federal government (represented by the FBI at its data complex in Clarksburg, West Virginia). Transfer or possession of a firearm to or by a criminal (a "federally prohibited possessor") is completely unaffected by the McCain-Lieberman "loophole" bill, so I guess it's accurate to characterize it as a loophole bill. To sum up: Perfectly legal gun sales -- with no victims or criminal activity of any kind -- are outlawed at gun shows by the McCain-Lieberman bill, unless the sale is pre-registered with the federal government; real crimes are totally unaffected; and your friends in the federal government take over full control of gun shows - which have been previously free of government infringement for more than 200 years. Please write your local news outlet and politely request a correction. Permission to circulate or use any or all of this report is granted, provided my credit and contact information is included. Alan Korwin, Author, Gun Laws of America Bloomfield Press, 12629 N. Tatum #440, Phoenix, AZ 85032 (602)996-4020 alan@gunlaws.com http://www.gunlaws.com "We publish the gun laws." CONCERNED ABOUT YOUR CHILDREN'S EDUCATION Story in SL Tribune- http://www.sltrib.com/05212001/utah/99173.htm The national Parent Teacher Association (PTA) has demonstrated a strong anti-gun bias. The Utah PTA is the leading agent in the ballot initiative to ban legal self defense in schools or churches. Along with these positions on gun issues, you may find many of their other positions on social issues at odds with your beliefs. Utah teachers are mostly fine, hard working people who sincerely care about educating our kids, but are subject to pressure from the PTA organization to teach material that is contrary to Utah values. We urge you to read the story in the May 21st Salt Lake Tribune http://www.sltrib.com/05212001/utah/99173.htm on a growing movement in Utah to sever ties with the national PTA and return control to local parents. We urge parents to consider the issue carefully and decide if they may want to become more involved in the local groups of parents and teachers work together for the benefit of their children. Utah Shooting Sports Council's free e-mail alert service: Help spread the word and protect your gun rights. Please forward this e-mail to anyone you think may be interested. If this alert was forwarded to you by someone other than USSC, or if your address has changed, you can sign up for alerts the Utah Shooting Sports web site at the following address: www.UtahShootingSports.org Visit our web-site at www.UtahShootingSports.org for the latest news and membership applications. Thanks for your time. Provided by the Utah Shooting Sports Council, Box 1975, Layton, UT 84041-6975 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Bergeson" Subject: Re: FWD: [LPUtah] FW: GUN SHOW BILL & PTA MATTERS Date: 24 May 2001 11:28:18 -0600 charles hardy wrote: >Note that the USSC *STILL* considers Hatch to be "pro-gun." >He *may* be mariginally better than some democrats, but even >that is arguable. Like a wolf in sheep's clothing, he passes >his gun control slower than Dems do, C-; "Leans Our Way: occasionally." according to http://www.gunowners.org/107srat.htm Fwiw, Bennett is rated D; "Leans Anti-Gun: usually against us." Scott - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: charles hardy Subject: FWD: Special MemDay Show on KTKK Date: 24 May 2001 17:53:57 -0400 (EDT) ------Original Message------ Historian Clayton E. Cramer will thoroughly debunk Prof. Michael Bellesiles' "Arming America" on my Memorial Day show. Bellesiles seems to believe there were only three dozen or so guns in the colonies and these were cleverly passed about to make the British think we were armed to the teeth. He seems to think that most colonial and later Americans were either completely defenseless or took their guns to the grave because they rarely passed them in on their wills. He also significantly and deliberately misquotes a number historical documents to make his case for an almost gun-free early America. Not surprisingly, he has already won prestigious awards from liberal organizations. So take your cell phone with your portable radio to your picnic on Monday, tune in AM-630 and call in. Jim Dexter Host RADIO LIBERTY Mondays & Wednesdays 11:00 AM to 1:00 PM (Mountain) KTKK-AM 630 -- Salt Lake City "The Voice of Utah" Listen live, online at http://www.k-talk.com (Windows Media Player available on-site) - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Bergeson" Subject: Anti-gunners Date: 28 May 2001 14:43:06 -0600 Pollster focuses on media's anti-gun bias ---------- "A leading opinion pollster said Sunday she believes the national media's anti-gun bias, as reflected in much of the reporting about gun crimes and gun issues, stems from the fact that most reporters and anchors don't know much about guns." (05/21/01) http://newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/5/21/95005.shtml Shot down ---------- by Jacob Sullum Sullum reflects on recent anti-gun lawsuits that have been thrown out of court, specifically a recent Chicago case against gun manufacturers. (05/18/01) http://www.townhall.com/columnists/jacobsullum/js20010515.shtml [Turn images off if it doesn't load] - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: charles hardy Subject: FWD: Re: [wagc-ut] FWD: Attempted Murder at Brickyard Plaza Date: 30 May 2001 17:09:40 -0400 (EDT) --385444145.991256980752.JavaMail.root@web395-wra.mail.com Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The following information was sent to me by a someone who wishes to remain anonymous. I believe the info is credible. My thanks to him/her for passing along this info. charles ------Original Message------ I was not there, but from what I understand from the officers that were was that the shooter and his brother were in their car. They got into a verbal argument with a kid they knew from a rival gang. The driver brandished his .22 handgun. The other kid was not impressed and a physical fight began. During the fight, the driver of the car fired at the rival gang member, hitting no one. All parties tried to run away on foot but were tackled and held down by employees and bystanders. I don't think that anyone with a CCP was there. ----- Original Message ----- Hi Charles This morning on 570 KNRS radio the news reported that there was an attempted murder at Brickyard Plaza. The report said something to the effect that an argument broke out between a guy walking thru the parking lot and a another guy in a parked car. The driver got out of the car and fired a shot at the pedestrian. The report went on to say that several shop owners and other bystanders held the shooter until police arrived. Hummm.... The shooter is armed and some bystanders held him until the police arrive? Wonder how many of those shop owners and bystanders were also armed with a CCP? I called 570 KNRS, 908-1300, and asked this same question, except the part about the CCP. The news lady who wrote the story admitted that she didn't ask, but would follow up and try to report the information this afternoon. Maybe they need some more polite calls asking for the complete story. --385444145.991256980752.JavaMail.root@web395-wra.mail.com Content-Type: text/html; name=Attachment1.html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=Attachment1.html Content-ID: Attachment1.html
I was not there, but from what I understan= d from=20 the officers that were was that the shooter and his brother were in their= =20 car.  They got into a verbal argument with a kid they knew from a riva= l=20 gang.  The driver brandished his .22 handgun.  The other kid was = not=20 impressed and a physical fight began.  During the fight, the driver of= the=20 car fired at the rival gang member, hitting no one.  All parties tried= to=20 run away on foot but were tackled and held down by employees and=20 bystanders.  I don't think that anyone with a CCP was there.
----- Original Message -----
Fro= m:=20 charle= s=20 hardy
To: wagc-ut@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 1:50 P= M
Subject: [wagc-ut] FWD: Attempted = Murder=20 at Brickyard Plaza


www.
3D"Yahoo! My Groups | wagc-ut Main Page=20
3D""=20

The following was sent to me by a personal acquantance.  I ha= ve no=20 details beyond this email, but I think his suggestion probably has=20 merit.  Or, if anyone has a firsthand knowledge, please let us=20 know.

Charles

------Original Message------
From: "David= =20 Sagers" <dsagers@ci.west-valley.ut.us= >
Sent:=20 May 22, 2001 7:30:57 PM GMT
Subject: Attempted Murder at Brickyard=20 Plaza


Hi Charles

This morning on 570 KNRS radio the new= s=20 reported that there was an attempted murder at Brickyard Plaza.  The= =20 report said something to the effect that an argument broke out between a = guy=20 walking thru the parking lot and a another guy in a parked car.

Th= e=20 driver got out of the car and fired a shot at the pedestrian.  The r= eport=20 went on to say that several shop owners and other bystanders held the sho= oter=20 until police arrived.

Hummm....  The shooter is armed and som= e=20 bystanders held him until the police arrive?  Wonder how many of tho= se=20 shop owners and bystanders were also armed with a CCP?

I called 57= 0=20 KNRS, 908-1300, and asked this same question, except the part about the= =20 CCP.  The news lady who wrote the story admitted that she didn't ask= , but=20 would follow up and try to report the information this afternoon.

= Maybe=20 they need some more polite calls asking for the complete=20 story.


-



This is an announce list=20 only.  If you have info
you'd like to forward to the list, pleas= e=20 send it
to wagc-ut-owner@yahoogroups.com.

To Unsubscribe, sen= d a=20 blank message to:
wagc-ut-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. 

= The=20 WAGC homepage is at <http://www.wagc.com>.

Your=20 use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.=20

--385444145.991256980752.JavaMail.root@web395-wra.mail.com-- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: charles hardy Subject: Garage thefts Date: 30 May 2001 18:16:25 -0400 (EDT) Forgive me for an off-topic post, but this may be of interest to you if you have an electric garage door opener. I just visited with a friend of mine here in Sandy. He went home for lunch today and discovered his garage door up and his $500.00 Honda lawn mower missing. A neighborhood girl saw a "scary man," bald on top, tall, driving a red truck with a red shell drive up, put the door up, and load up the lawn mower. It seems the thief used some kind of transmitter to open the door. A police report has been filed, but obviously, trying to recover a lawn mower is tough. My friend has a 6 month old, Genie, screw drive door opener with the "Intellicode" rolling code remotes. Until now, I had assumed that such openers were highly resistant to being opened with a remote other than one the owner specifically programmed to open it. Obviously, such a theft takes only a moment and I know of no way to prevent it short of unplugging the electric opener and going back to manual key locks on the doors--an option most of us would loathe. But at least when you are going to be away for a protracted period of time (vacation, etc) you might want to consider unplugging or otherwise disabling the openers on your garage doors. Also bear in mind the possibility of such a theft if you think you hear your garage door going up when it really shouldn't do so. You might also want to consider how good the locks are between the gargage and your home and whether you use them as frequently as you should. You may also want to consider if various items currently stored in the garage would not be safer in an attic, basement, or locked tool shed. Just thinking out loud here. If anyone has any info or advice on increasing security of garages without sacrificing the convenience (and safety) of electric openers, I'd love to hear about it. Charles. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "larry larsen" Subject: RE: Garage thefts Date: 30 May 2001 22:15:23 -0700 Charles I thought of that one time and turned off the breaker to the garage door, and a few other things, like the freezer. We weren't gone that long, only a few days and things weren't' in bad shape. of course everyone is smarter than that. Larry -----Original Message----- [mailto:owner-utah-firearms@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of charles hardy Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 3:16 PM Cc: utah-firearms@xmission.com Forgive me for an off-topic post, but this may be of interest to you if you have an electric garage door opener. I just visited with a friend of mine here in Sandy. He went home for lunch today and discovered his garage door up and his $500.00 Honda lawn mower missing. A neighborhood girl saw a "scary man," bald on top, tall, driving a red truck with a red shell drive up, put the door up, and load up the lawn mower. It seems the thief used some kind of transmitter to open the door. A police report has been filed, but obviously, trying to recover a lawn mower is tough. My friend has a 6 month old, Genie, screw drive door opener with the "Intellicode" rolling code remotes. Until now, I had assumed that such openers were highly resistant to being opened with a remote other than one the owner specifically programmed to open it. Obviously, such a theft takes only a moment and I know of no way to prevent it short of unplugging the electric opener and going back to manual key locks on the doors--an option most of us would loathe. But at least when you are going to be away for a protracted period of time (vacation, etc) you might want to consider unplugging or otherwise disabling the openers on your garage doors. Also bear in mind the possibility of such a theft if you think you hear your garage door going up when it really shouldn't do so. You might also want to consider how good the locks are between the gargage and your home and whether you use them as frequently as you should. You may also want to consider if various items currently stored in the garage would not be safer in an attic, basement, or locked tool shed. Just thinking out loud here. If anyone has any info or advice on increasing security of garages without sacrificing the convenience (and safety) of electric openers, I'd love to hear about it. Charles. - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Bergeson" Subject: FW: ALERT: A Plan for the UN's Gun Burning Party Date: 31 May 2001 23:47:13 -0600 Dear JPFO Members and Supporters, Several people asked us what they could do to show their disgust with the UN's gun prohibition agenda. Some folks suggested demonstrations should be organized. Here's an easy way to protest the UN's plans -- and a great excuse to visit the range: 1. Get some of JPFO's shooting targets that show the UN flag, see http://www.jpfo.org/target-un.htm 2. Shoot holes in them. (That's the fun part!) 3. Mail them to American politicians and opinion makers with the message "Here is what I think about the UN and its plan to disarm Americans with global 'gun control'." (Or whatever message you'd like). Option: If you don't want to send a bullet-riddled target, then set it afire and burn part of it ... they'll get the message. -