From: owner-utah-firearms-digest@lists.xmission.com (utah-firearms-digest) To: utah-firearms-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: utah-firearms-digest V2 #29 Reply-To: utah-firearms-digest Sender: owner-utah-firearms-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-utah-firearms-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk utah-firearms-digest Friday, February 27 1998 Volume 02 : Number 029 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 26 Feb 1998 18:03:14 -0700 From: chardy@ES.COM (Charles Hardy) Subject: Sent to Sec. Received auto notification that the status of SB23, Negligent storage of a firearm, had changed. Change history is below. Anyone know what the last item, today's update means, and is it cause for concern? - -- S.B. 23 Negligent Storage of Loaded Firearm (Steiner, R.) 01/06/98 Number LRGC 01/08/98 Bill Distributed LRGC 01/19/98 Senate/read 1st (Introduced) SPRES 02/02/98 Senate/to Standing Committee SSTTPS 02/26/98 Senate/comm rpt sent to Senate Secretary SSEC Charles C. Hardy | If my employer has an opinion on | these things I'm fairly certain 801.588.7200 (work) | I'm not the one he'd have express it. "The prohibition is general. No clause in the Constitution could by rule of construction be conceived to give the Congress the power to disarm the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some general pretense by a state legislature. But if in blind pursuit of inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both." -- William Rawle, 1825; considered academically to be an expert commentator on the Constitution. He was offered the position of the first Attorney General of the United States, by President Washington. - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Feb 1998 23:41:16 -0700 From: chardy@ES.COM (Charles Hardy) Subject: [Vin_Suprynowicz@lvrj.com: Feb. 26 column - Anthrax] The latest from Vin... - ----BEGIN FORWARDED MESSGE---- FROM MOUNTAIN MEDIA FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE DATED FEB. 26, 1998 THE LIBERTARIAN, By Vin Suprynowicz The Great Las Vegas Anthrax Plot The news flashed around the world on Thursday, Feb. 19. I know, because I started getting phone calls from New England, and e-mail from Asia ... asking me if I'd broken out my gas masks. The news was accepted at face value in most places, too ... because it was precisely what many folks had been led to expect. A pair of depraved white men -- one a former Mormon bishop and the other (according to a hastily-drawn-up federal criminal complaint) a "self-admitted member of the Aryan Nations (who) claims to have the rank of Lieutenant-Colonel," had been busted by FBI agents and thrown in a Las Vegas hoosegow, while the Mercedes-Benz they had been driving was carefully shrink-wrapped in plastic and hauled away to a U.S. Army facility for testing. Why? "These individuals posed a potential chemical and biological threat to our community," Bobby Siller, head of the FBI's Las Vegas office, told members of the working press at a Thursday morning press conference. A "citizen informant (hereafter 'the source')" had telephoned the Las Vegas offices of the FBI on Feb. 18 -- again according to the criminal complaint - -- to report that suspects Larry Wayne Harris, 46 (a licensed microbiologist from Lancaster, Ohio), and William Job Leavitt, Jr., 47 (a fire extinguisher manufacturer, owner of a pair of microbiological laboratories, and former Mormon bishop from Logandale, Nevada) were in possession of what Leavitt had reportedly described as "military grade" anthrax in flight bags in the trunk of their Mercedes-Benz convertible. Another source, spotted with Leavitt and Harris at the Gold Coast Hotel, reportedly told the FBI that Harris held out a vial and stated there was enough there to "wipe out the city." FBI Special Agent John W. Hawken further alleged in his Feb. 19 criminal complaint -- this time citing no specific source -- that Harris, the Ohio microbiologist, had "in the summer of 1997 ... told a group of plans to place a 'globe' of bubonic plague toxins in a New York subway station, where it could be broken by a passing subway train, causing hundreds of thousands of deaths. Harris stated that the Iraqis would be blamed for that event." 'Go write your own Civil Defense manual' But something about this one smelled wrong from the start. Defendant Harris had appeared as a guest on Las Vegas-based radio talk shows within the previous week, spouting his obsessive concern that the Iraqis were preparing to launch precisely the kind of biological attack the FBI was talking about, and that the United States was ill-prepared to defend against any such attack. Patriot sources on the Internet (ever paranoid) immediately theorized that the FBI had busted well-known gadfly Harris precisely to shift the blame for any such attack -- considered all the more likely if Bill Clinton proceeded with plans to renew bombing of Saddam Hussein -- onto the FBI's favorite target, the gun-owning domestic patriot militias. Only a few minutes work were required for Las Vegas Review-Journal columnist John L. Smith to download from the Internet and hand me the opening section of Larry Wayne Harris' book, "Bacteriological Warfare: A Major Threat to North America, What You and Your Family Can Do Defensively, Before and After." (http://norden1.com/~hawkins/CIVIL.HTM) In it, Harris describes taking courses in advanced microbiology at Ohio State University in 1991, and meeting there fellow student Miriam Arif, daughter of a former Iraqi president. After the two became friends, Arif reportedly told Harris in 1993 of the plans of Libya, Iran, Iraq, Syria And North Korea to respond to any future American interventions in their regions by loosing germ warfare weapons in this country. It is agents of those nations that plan to release plague and anthrax cultures in the subway systems of large American cities, according to Harris' writings. Harris reports calling the FBI, and the CDC in both Atlanta and Fort Collins. "I told them what Miriam had told me, and they responded that they thought I had been watching too many science fiction movies." After repeatedly promising to send Harris a copy of the government contingency plan to deal with such an attack, Harris writes that he was finally told by exasperated spokesmen at the CDC that all such biological civil defense planning had been scrapped in 1972. "They said if I were a microbiologist and so concerned, why don't I go and write my own Civil Defense manual and leave the CDC alone?" Would a man planning to kill thousands via a germ warfare attack, write books and appear on the radio, drawing attention to himself by warning Americans of how unprepared we are to deal with such an attack? What would Harris' motive be, anyway? Might it not be possible that the FBI's sources had misunderstood Harris' intense warnings about Miriam Arif, as threats he himself was making? Time machines and UFOs The possibility grew even stronger when it turned out FBI agent Hawken had admitted in his initial criminal complaint that the FBI's main source "has two felony convictions for conspiracy to commit extortion in 1981 and 1982." I have been unable to independently confirm that Ronald G. Rockwell -- since identified by numerous sources as the FBI's main informant -- was indeed twice convicted on extortion counts. But Leavitt's attorney, Kirby Wells, paints quite a picture of Rockwell, reporting that at a Feb. 14 meeting Rockwell offered to sell Leavitt more than just the machine Leavitt wanted to conduct anthrax research. "He offered as part of the deal to turn over work on other projects, including a time machine project and a UFO project," attorney Wells told Review-Journal reporter Steve Friess on Feb. 23. "I questioned Bill about whether it made sense to be negotiating with someone who professed to have these kinds of projects." Eventually, Leavitt did reject Rockwell's demand that he buy a so-called Rife Regenerator for $2 million, including a non-refundable $100,000 deposit. (The discredited Rife machine, which is supposed to cure illness through radio waves, usually sells for $20,000.) Within days, the disappointed Rockwell apparently telephoned the FBI to turn Leavitt and Harris in. Paul Pantone, chief executive officer for research at Global Environmental Energy Technology LLC, spent 15 minutes chatting with Rockwell at a conference in Las Vegas last April, and pronounces the fellow "a total fruitcake." "He said he can build flying saucers any size you want," said Pantone, whose Utah company specializes in far more mundane mileage-boosting automotive fuel processors. "He said he has a plane the size of a 747 that extracts energy out of the air as it moves and flies for hours on one gallon of gasoline. He has it hidden somewhere in Nevada. ... For the FBI to even listen to this man, I'm appalled," Pantone told reporter Friess. False alarm Businessman Leavitt was released from jail on Saturday, Feb. 21. Scientists at the Army's Medical Research Institute for Infectious Diseases in Fort Detrick, Md. (where the Army stores precisely the kinds of toxic agents which President Clinton brands other nations "terrorist" for developing) had worked through the night analyzing the contents of the Harris-Leavitt vials, and found them to contain exactly what the defendants said they contained -- veterinary anthrax vaccine, incapable of forming spores to spread the disease to either humans or animals. Informant Rockwell "wanted money up front, sight unseen, and when he didn't get it ... he went to the FBI and made some outlandish statements," says Leavitt's other attorney, Lamond Mills. "That's their witness. And on that, we've had worldwide news." After a final weekend FBI search of both defendants' homes to see if they could find anything else to hold them on, all criminal charges against both defendants were dropped on Monday, Feb. 23. Mind you, Ohioan Harris would appear to be several stops down the local line toward Bonkersville, himself. He signed a consent decree in 1995, under which he is still on probation for fraudulently obtaining bubonic plague toxins for his research. His book contains such unattributed nuggets as his rambling report that "The HIV (AIDS) virus ... was designed to kill only Negro's (sic). The HIV virus was ... inoculated into Negro's for their genocidal removal from Africa. The HIV virus was designed to use an intermediate bacterial carrier, that was present in the Negro's body but not present in Caucasians. This strategy has been extremely effective and by some estimates the Negro population of Africa will soon be reduced to below 5 million." Yeah, right. So: should police agents have had some serious questions for Messrs. Harris and Leavitt? Of course. Should they have acquired warrants to seize and test the material in question? OK; fine. But the broadest public response to this whole tempest in a teapot seems to be that the FBI was justified in acting swiftly -- even if the tip turned out to be wrong -- given the virulence of the agents the two men supposedly possessed. I feel obliged to offer a somewhat different perspective. Infiltrate the churches, shoot the dogs The FBI, as currently composed, is an illegal and unconstitutional agency. The Constitution grants the Congress no power to swear in any federal political police force, the familiar German word for which is "Gestapo." In recent years -- leaving aside its treatment of the presumably innocent security guard Richard Jewel while the real perpetrators of Atlanta's Olympic Park bombing walked away at their leisure -- this proud and courageous agency stood in charge of the final, deadly, tank, machine gun, and poison gas assault on the parishioners of the Mount Carmel Seventh Day Adventist Church in Waco, Texas, which directly caused the deaths by fire and poison gas of dozens of innocent women and children. (See it for yourself, as filmed by federal government cameras: Order the video "Waco: The Terms of Engagement," now nominated for an Academy Award as best documentary, at $25 by dialing 1-800-771-2147, ext. 19.) Only a few months before, FBI sniper Lon Horiuchi, acting under FBI orders, shot and killed the unarmed Vicky Weaver in the kitchen doorway of her Idaho home as she held her baby in her arms. (The federal government is still involved in procedural shenanigans to shield Horiuchi from facing the criminal charges he so richly deserves for that little feat of marksmanship.) The Weaver standoff started when federal agents approached and entrapped Vicky Weaver's husband, Randy, in order to convince him to infiltrate and snitch on parishioners of a nearby church. The Waco standoff started when ATF agents turned down the Rev. David Koresh's invitation to come out and inspect his parishioners' fully legal firearms "any time," preferring to stage a big military-style raid for the TV cameras, shortly before their next set of funding hearings in Washington. In both cases, the federals targeted churches. In both cases, the first shots were fired by federal agents, killing their victims' dogs. But under our American system, it is (start ital)not(end ital) acceptable to trash the First, Second, and Fourth Amendment rights of the politically unpopular few, in order to "protect the many" even from real threats ... let alone trumped-up ones. If it were, the FBI would be justified in sending SWAT teams into the homes of the 100 patriot militiamen and foreign nationals which it judges most likely to cause trouble, with orders to simply shoot them all through the head. Nevada has a State Police force. Las Vegas has its own, sizeable, Metropolitan Police. Those agencies had sole jurisdiction in this case. All law enforcement, under our constitutional system of government, is left to local authority. (start ital)No(end ital) federal police force is authorized. The safest thing for the liberties of the citizens of this republic would be to disband the deadly, incompetent FBI, immediately. Failing that, this homicidal gang should at least be restricted to what the "I" in its name stands for, "Investigation" (keeping up to date with what's readily available on talk radio and the Internet, for starters -- and perhaps keeping running tabs on the credibility of such local snitches as Ronald G. Rockwell, while they're at it.) When they feel an arrest is justified, they should do just what everyone else does: Call the police. As goofy as Larry Wayne Harris may be, he has a point. If we keep meddling in the affairs of nations that can't afford to build aircraft carriers and nuclear bombers, they will eventually strike back in any way they can ... quite possibly with such cheap, easy-to-employ weapons as germ warfare and poison gas. (Calling them "terrorists" proves nothing. Generals Howe and Cornwallis doubtless would have called the brigand Washington -- unwilling to line up all his men across an open field and fight it out in a sporting manner -- a "terrorist.") But instead of heeding such a sensible warning, the federals just arrest the messenger. Anyone interested in disarming America's criminal element would do well to start with the incompetent and counterproductive ATF and the FBI ... auctioning off their Tommy guns and MP-5s to law-abiding private citizens, who would then be in a much better position to drop by their offices occasionally, "just to check." Then, if we're finally tired of making enemies overseas, comes the CIA. Vin Suprynowicz is the assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas Review-Journal. Readers may contact him via e-mail at vin@lvrj.com. The web site for the Suprynowicz column is at http://www.nguworld.com/vindex/. The column is syndicated in the United States and Canada via Mountain Media Syndications, P.O. Box 4422, Las Vegas Nev. 89127. *** Vin Suprynowicz, vin@lvrj.com "If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains set lightly upon you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." -- Samuel Adams - ----END FORWARDED MESSAGE---- - -- Charles C. Hardy | If my employer has an opinion on | these things I'm fairly certain 801.588.7200 (work) | I'm not the one he'd have express it. God created all men equal. Sam Colt made sure they remain that way. - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Feb 98 21:17:00 -0700 From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: USSC Legislative ALERTS!! On Thu, 26 Feb 1998 S. Thompson replied to Charles Hardy: >However, the Board is not going to know what you think unless you tell THEM. Do any USSC Board members other than Dr. Sarah Thompson read the uf list? It would seem a good idea for them to do so. Or do most of them depend on people making telephone calls specially to them? That would seem rather inefficient for both the caller and the recipient of the call. It certainly appears 4 of them don't want anyone to know what they think unless they make special trips to Kaysville to attend Board meetings every Monday. How can the other 3 be bound by that vote? It would appear a violation of free speech to gag Board members from stating their positions and votes on USSC actions, and while a contract can override constitutionally-secured rights, if the USSC imposes such a contract on its Board members this does not make support of the USSC attractive. Perhaps time to replace the USSC as the voice of gun rights supporters in Utah? - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 01:22:32 -0700 From: chardy@ES.COM (Charles Hardy) Subject: Re: USSC Legislative ALERTS!! Sarah posted contact info a while back. I thought I had saved it, but apparantly did not. Sarah, would you be so good as to post that again? I should make everyone aware that in addition to Sarah, only one board member has contacted me regarding the 10 questions I posted here and which Sarah presented to the USSC board. That response I considered very positive. I only wish the other board members had responed as well, let alone at all. Apparantly the board voted and decided that individual members would only respond to the questions if they wanted to do so strictly as an individual. The board itself would respond by passing along some formal positions adopted by the previous board. I've not seen that info yet but will pass it along if it ever shows up. It seems the majority of board members do not want the USSC membership or the gun owning non-members of this State to know their true position on gun rights or even how they voted on any given issue. So far there are only 2 of the 7 members in whom I can place any confidence. I'm hoping based on what I've heard, there is a 3rd who is ok, as well. Three out of 7 may be a start, but at this point I'm not prepared to offer my financial support. I do plan to attend meetings whenever possible which is going to be few and far between since I'd have to leave work at a reasonable hour and fight commuter traffic between SLC and Kaysville to get there. Any meeting I attend I will do my very best to record votes, etc and pass along. I ask others to do likewise. Assuming it looks like there is hope, I will consider joining just soon enough to vote in the next election and try to put the true rights, no-compromise, respond to questions, not afraid to let their views be known advocates in a majority. For heaven sakes, even the State legislators record votes and publish them on the internet for at least committee business. Of what are those 4 members of the USSC board afraid? Maybe if enough members keep track and let board members know which votes will cause loss of support for them and/or lack of renewal and if enough non-members let the board know exactly why we aren't members yet, they will get the message and change their ways or will get off the board and let someone who really values and understands rights do the job they seem unwilling to do. I fear too many are far too cozy with the NRA. And yes, I agree completely that it would behoov board members to at least read this list, if not become active participants in it. If they want to claim to represent gun owners' interests in this State, they should make at least as much effort to search out those interests as gun owners make to make them known. Accolades to Sarah for doing just that and much more. On Thu, 26 Feb 98 21:17:00 -0700, scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) posted: > >On Thu, 26 Feb 1998 S. Thompson replied to Charles Hardy: > >>However, the Board is not going to know what you think unless you tell THEM. > >Do any USSC Board members other than Dr. Sarah Thompson read the uf >list? It would seem a good idea for them to do so. Or do most of them >depend on people making telephone calls specially to them? That would >seem rather inefficient for both the caller and the recipient of the >call. It certainly appears 4 of them don't want anyone to know what >they think unless they make special trips to Kaysville to attend Board >meetings every Monday. How can the other 3 be bound by that vote? It >would appear a violation of free speech to gag Board members from stating >their positions and votes on USSC actions, and while a contract can >override constitutionally-secured rights, if the USSC imposes such a >contract on its Board members this does not make support of the USSC >attractive. Perhaps time to replace the USSC as the voice of gun rights >supporters in Utah? > > > > >- > > - -- Charles C. Hardy | If my employer has an opinion on | these things I'm fairly certain 801.588.7200 (work) | I'm not the one he'd have express it. "Who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except for a few public officials." -- George Mason, Framer of the Declaration of Rights, Virginia, 1776, which became the basis for the U.S. Bill of Rights; 3 Elliot, Debates at 425-426. - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 02:03:38 -0700 From: "S. Thompson" Subject: Re: USSC At 09:17 PM 2/26/98 -0700, you wrote: > >On Thu, 26 Feb 1998 S. Thompson replied to Charles Hardy: > >>However, the Board is not going to know what you think unless you tell THEM. > >Do any USSC Board members other than Dr. Sarah Thompson read the uf >list? It would seem a good idea for them to do so. Or do most of them >depend on people making telephone calls specially to them? That would >seem rather inefficient for both the caller and the recipient of the >call. It certainly appears 4 of them don't want anyone to know what >they think unless they make special trips to Kaysville to attend Board >meetings every Monday. How can the other 3 be bound by that vote? It >would appear a violation of free speech to gag Board members from stating >their positions and votes on USSC actions, and while a contract can >override constitutionally-secured rights, if the USSC imposes such a >contract on its Board members this does not make support of the USSC >attractive. Perhaps time to replace the USSC as the voice of gun rights >supporters in Utah? I'm the only Board (or Advisory Board) member of USSC who's subscribed to utah-firearms. Most, but not all, of the other members have e-mail capabilities. However, my impression is that not too many read e-mail with any regularity or are very comfortable with computers. I've posted the e-mail addresses of all who were willing to make them available, so you can e-mail at least those members. But I suspect most of them do prefer telephone contact. As I understand the so-called "gag order", members may not _publish_ positions or votes. (I don't have the exact language.) I don't think there's any prohibition against stating one's position or vote. But there are huge gray areas such as private e-mail and public statements. I can understand that the Board would not want internal discord aired publicly - at least during the legislative session, when it's necessary for the most part to present a united front. (I'm not saying I agree or disagree, but I do understand this point of view.) However, I don't see why that should preclude recording votes and publishing them immediately after the session. However, with the possible exception of during the legislative session, it makes no sense to me to suppress one Constitutional right while fighting for another. The first and second amendments depend upon each other - as do all our rights. The problem is that the only people complaining are non-members. The only member who's let me know he has complaints is Will. No Board member has any obligation or mandate to represent anyone other than members, and I'm not sure how many will be receptive to comments from non-members. Certainly there's room for more than one gun rights organization in Utah. There's already the Utah Gun Rights Association, the Utah Rifle and Pistol Assoc. and a few more whose names don't immediately come to mind. If anyone wants to start a chapter of NRA, GOA, Brassroots, SAFE, CCRKBA or even another independent organization, they're free to do so. And if some other organization can do a better job than USSC, more power to them! I might even join. But since I'm the only Board member here, complaining about USSC on u-f isn't going to do any good. If you want to tell anyone but me what you think, you're going to have to do it their way, since I know of no way to force anyone to subscribe to or read u-f. (Not that I'd force anyone anyway!) Contact info follows: The following Board members have volunteered to have their contact info made public. Please feel free to contact them, but please do not abuse their open-door policy. Doug Henrichsen, 771-3196(h), cathounds@aol.com Elwood Powell, 426-8274 or 583-2882 (h), 364-0412 (w), 73214.3115@compuserve.com Shirley Spain, 963-0784, agr@aros.net Bob Templeton, 544-9125 (h), 546-2275 (w) Sarah Thompson, 566-1067, righter@therighter.com Joe Venus, 571-2223 Because of the confusion over whether comments via e-mail are permitted, I'd suggest phone calls. There are a lot of gun owners in Utah, and they have widely divergent views. Some are "no compromise" people. Some only care about concealed carry. Some only care about hunting, or target shooting, or collecting. Some are confrontational, and some prefer not to "make waves". I don't honestly think one organization can be everything to everyone. OTOH, if we split into too many factions, we're likely to end up with no voice at all. I don't have any perfect, or even very good, ideas on how to solve this problem. But I am open to suggestions. Sarah - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 98 06:45:00 -0700 From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: USSC Contact Info On Fri, 27 Feb 1998 01:22:32 Charles Hardy asked: >Sarah posted contact info a while back. I thought I had saved it, but >apparantly did not. Sarah, would you be so good as to post that again? I'm not Sarah, but here it is: The following Board members have volunteered to have their contact info made public. Please feel free to contact them, but please do not abuse their open-door policy. All of us are VERY busy right now. Doug Henrichsen, 771-3196(h), cathounds@aol.com Elwood Powell, 426-8274 or 583-2882 (h), 364-0412 (w), 73214.3115@compuserve.com Shirley Spain, 963-0784, agr@aros.net Bob Templeton, 544-9125 (h), 546-2275 (w) Sarah Thompson, 566-1067, righter@therighter.com (I prefer e-mail to phone calls when possible). Joe Venus, 571-2223 - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 10:07:27 -0700 From: DAVID SAGERS Subject: ACTION ALERT: "Anti " Article in LHJ -Forwarded Received: (qmail 19538 invoked by uid 516); 27 Feb 1998 03:17:58 -0000 Delivered-To: rkba-co@majordomo.pobox.com Received: (qmail 19337 invoked from network); 27 Feb 1998 03:17:42 -0000 Received: from ocelot.avana.net (HELO Email.Avana.Net) (205.245.133.6) by majordomo.pobox.com with SMTP; 27 Feb 1998 03:17:42 -0000 Received: from tiger.avana.net (tiger.avana.net [205.245.133.2]) by Email.Avana.Net (8.8.7/8.8.6) with ESMTP id LAA28908; Thu, 26 Feb 1998 11:27:56 -0500 Received: from nancys (atl867.avana.net [207.42.62.157]) by tiger.avana.net (8.8.7/8.8.6) with SMTP id WAA00415; Thu, 26 Feb 1998 22:18:50 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <34F6303E.2787@2die4.com> Date: Thu, 26 Feb 1998 22:17:18 -0500 From: Nancy Organization: Real Pro Second Amendment Activist Never Give Up. X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rkba-co@majordomo.pobox.com, texas-gun-owners@zilker.net, GA-RKBA@athens.net, ma-firearms@world.std.com, pa-rkba@pobox.com Subject: ACTION ALERT: "Anti " Article in LHJ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-rkba-co.new@majordomo.pobox.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rkba-co@majordomo.pobox.com Posted to rkba-co by Nancy - ----------------------- Subject: ACTION ALERT: "Anti" Article in Ladies Home Journal Date: Thu, 26 Feb 98 22:03:05 EST5EDT From: ladybug@fiber-net.com (Brenda Bernard ) To: undisclosed-recipients:; Dear Brother / Sister Shooters, I just received information, from a sister shooter, about an article appearing in the current "Ladies Home Journal, p. 28 praising women in the "war against guns". The article highlights "Tina Johnstone" whose husband was gunned down by a criminal. "Tina" is organizing a march on D.C. and wants to make a pile of several thousands of shoes of victims. I am sure there will be many shoes thrown in there for the heck of it and the media will have a hay day dramatically portraying all the shoes as being worn by victims. You may want to visit a news stand and see the article for yourself before responding. It does not seem to be in their website publication. "Tina Johnstone's" committee phone number is (516) 247-9101. Ladies Home Journal 125 Park Avenue New York, N.Y. 10017 E-mail: LHJ@nyc.mdp.com Website: http://www.lhj.com Toll free: (800) 347-4545 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Brenda Bernard (Ladybug) P.O. Box 1997 Crystal River, FL 34423-1997 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Women AGAINST Gun Control @ www.wagc.com GUNS GIVE WOMEN A FIGHTING CHANCE All THOSE IN FAVOR OF LOSING YOUR GUN RIGHTS, DO NOTHING For Help with Majordomo Commands, please send a message to: Majordomo@majordomo.pobox.com with the word Help in the body of the message - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 11:22:17 -0700 From: Will Thompson Subject: Re: USSC Legislative ALERTS!! SCOTT BERGESON wrote: > > On Thu, 26 Feb 1998 S. Thompson replied to Charles Hardy: > > >However, the Board is not going to know what you think unless you tell THEM. > > Do any USSC Board members other than Dr. Sarah Thompson read the uf > list? It would seem a good idea for them to do so. Or do most of them > depend on people making telephone calls specially to them? That would > seem rather inefficient for both the caller and the recipient of the > call. I have sent the last few of these to Shirley at AGR/UGRA with the suggestion that she subscribe and "listen in" to our arguments and suggestions. I know she's busy but I've told here that this is mostly a fairly low-volume mail list, maybe she'll have enough spare time and energy to spend some of it with us. > It certainly appears 4 of them don't want anyone to know what > they think unless they make special trips to Kaysville to attend Board > meetings every Monday. How can the other 3 be bound by that vote? It > would appear a violation of free speech to gag Board members from stating > their positions and votes on USSC actions, and while a contract can > override constitutionally-secured rights, if the USSC imposes such a > contract on its Board members this does not make support of the USSC > attractive. Perhaps time to replace the USSC as the voice of gun rights > supporters in Utah? While I disagree vehemently with their stand, I can sort of understand why they are taking it. These guys, especially Bob, are all respected "businessmen and pillars of the community" (gag) and if Dan Harrie or Vince Horiuchi got hold of something they could use to embarrass them or otherwise damage their reputation/business, you can bet they'd use it in a heartbeat. These guys are scared, with reason, I believe. I don't believe any of them except Sarah (and maybe Joe and Shirley, I haven't asked them) have accepted that we've probably already lost the war and _will_ lose it if we don't go on the offensive - hard and fast. They're still proud of being "life members of NRA" as if that proves how _staunchly_ they support the 2nd. And as always....the target pistol shooters don't really care about anything but "sporting use". The hunters just want to be able to keep the "ol' thuty-thuty". The CCW'ers want a better/longer permit. The collectors want the pre-paid (in rights) convenience of not having to pay BCI every time they make a trade...meanwhile the few of us who dispise CCW, who want a return to pre-NFA liberty, are fighting our own absolutest battles...Yeah, I'm proud to be an "extremest", but I also realize that I scare the bejeezus out of guys like Bob Templeton. Education is all I can try and offer them, realizing that it's going to take even longer for them to (maybe) come 'round than it did for me. (What with my pre-disposition to fight authority) So I'm going to stand out here, vent my frustrations here and keep trying to get the "them" board members to see the light...dunno what else to do...it's "them" who're going to have to bring the hunters, paper punchers, and other factions with us and we ain't gonna get that by slammin em down every time they don't get it. Sarah tells me that Jews put honey on the pages of the Torah to get their children to read it and associate "sweetness" with it...seems like a good idea...if only I can keep from flippin my lid every time someone does something "stupid".... vent vent vent - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 11:28:39 -0700 From: Will Thompson Subject: steiner and beattie After that last bit....now I don't have time to look it up....in this morning's Trib was a short article about how Steiner and Beattie have teamed up (sort of like putting two amoebas in a bowl...) to amend the bill describing how one's CCW may be revoked, by adding the church ban....(indeciperable, I know) - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 11:34:11 -0700 From: chardy@ES.COM (Charles Hardy) Subject: Re: steiner and beattie Which section? I can't find it. On Fri, 27 Feb 1998, Will Thompson posted: >After that last bit....now I don't have time to look it >up....in this morning's Trib was a short article about >how Steiner and Beattie have teamed up (sort of like >putting two amoebas in a bowl...) to amend the bill >describing how one's CCW may be revoked, by adding the >church ban....(indeciperable, I know) > >- > > - -- Charles C. Hardy | If my employer has an opinion on | these things I'm fairly certain 801.588.7200 (work) | I'm not the one he'd have express it. "That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent *the people* of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms ..." -- Samuel Adams in arguing for a Bill of Rights, from the book "Massachusetts," published by Pierce & Hale, Boston, 1850, pg. 86-87. - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 11:43:26 -0700 From: WILL THOMPSON Subject: Re: steiner and beattie The legislative update section, bottom middle of the page in the print version - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 12:27:45 -0700 From: chardy@ES.COM (Charles Hardy) Subject: Gun Ban not dead yet!! From today's tribune, Legislative update section--"Briefs" article: HB242 orignally only made some minor technical and clarifications on how and when a CCW permit may be revoked and has sailed through thus far. GUN BILL NOT DEAD YET Legislation banning legally permitted concealed weapons in certain buildings is not dead yet. Democrats plan to amend a bill to prohibit weapons-permit holders from carrying their guns to church. ``It's one of the areas where there is a great deal of consensus. It's one thing that we can do,'' said Sen. Robert Steiner, D-Salt Lake City. Senate President Lane Beattie was planning to spearhead the move to ban concealed weapons in churches, private property and schools, but pulled out last week because of mounting legal questions about the move. But the West Bountiful Republican said he will vote for Steiner's amendment. Steiner said he will amend House Bill 242, which details circumstances when a concealed-weapons permit can be revoked. -- The Associated Press - -- Charles C. Hardy | If my employer has an opinion on | these things I'm fairly certain 801.588.7200 (work) | I'm not the one he'd have express it. "A government resting on the minority is an aristocracy, not a Republic, and could not be safe with a numerical and physical force against it, without a standing army, an enslaved press and a disarmed populace." -- James Madison, The Federalist Papers (No. 46). - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 12:56:08 -0700 From: DAVID SAGERS Subject: Re: Victims fight back (Tennessee Bill) -Forwarded Received: (from smap@localhost) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id GAA27338; Fri, 27 Feb 1998 06:58:33 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 06:58:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1) by fs1.mainstream.net via smap (V1.3) id sma027287; Fri Feb 27 06:57:21 1998 Message-Id: <34F6A95A.9923816A@inetnebr.com> Errors-To: listproc@mainstream.com Reply-To: lball@inetnebr.com Originator: noban@mainstream.net Sender: noban@Mainstream.net Precedence: bulk From: larry ball To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Victims fight back (Tennessee Bill) X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list Here is the text of the bill. I am sending a copy to a Nebraska State Senator for consideration. Filed for intro on 01/21/98 SENATE BILL 2167 By Cohen HOUSE BILL 2260 By Buck AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 39, Chapter 11, Part 6, to enact the "Victim and Citizen Criminal Apprehension and Protection Act of 1998" authorizing the use of force to apprehend certain suspected felons and for the protection of persons and property from such felons. BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE: SECTION 1. This act shall be known and may be cited as the "Victim and Citizen Criminal Apprehension and Protection Act of 1998". SECTION 2. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 39-11-621, is amended by designating the existing language as subsection (a) and by adding the following new subsections: (b) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a), a private citizen is justified in threatening or using all necessary force, including deadly force, to apprehend a person who is committing or has committed first or second degree murder, attempt to commit first or second degree murder, aggravated robbery, especially aggravated robbery, rape, aggravated rape, or rape of a child if the citizen uses such force: A) While the defendant is on the same property where the offense was committed or attempted to be committed or on any public property adjoining such property; and B) During or in fresh pursuit of the person after commission or attempted commission of the offense. (c) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a), a private citizen present in a motor vehicle is justified in threatening or using all necessary force, including deadly force, against a person whom one reasonably believes is attempting to use unlawful force against such citizen while committing or attempting to commit the offense of carjacking. (d) Any private citizen using deadly force to apprehend a suspected felon under the circumstances set out in subsection (b) or who uses deadly force pursuant to subsection (c) is presumed to have been put in reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or serious bodily harm to self or others by such offender and the use of deadly force is justified even though the person using such force does not retreat from the encounter. (e) Any private citizen who uses force under the circumstances authorized by subsections (b) or (c) shall be absolutely immune from actual or punitive damages resulting from property damage, injury or death either accidentally or intentionally inflicted by such citizen upon the person or persons who committed or attempted to commit one or more of the enumerated offenses. SECTION 2. This act shall take effect on July 1, 1998, the public welfare requiring it. Return to Main Bill Index - - ------------------------------ End of utah-firearms-digest V2 #29 **********************************