From: owner-utah-firearms-digest@lists.xmission.com (utah-firearms-digest) To: utah-firearms-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: utah-firearms-digest V2 #31 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 Wednesday, March 4 1998 Volume 02 : Number 031 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 02 Mar 1998 14:46:03 -0700 From: DAVID SAGERS Subject: Good pro-RKBA restaurant in Colorado Springs... -Forwarded Received: (qmail 8190 invoked by uid 516); 2 Mar 1998 18:44:27 -0000 Delivered-To: rkba-co@majordomo.pobox.com Received: (qmail 8164 invoked from network); 2 Mar 1998 18:44:21 -0000 Received: from mail11.digital.com (192.208.46.10) by majordomo.pobox.com with SMTP; 2 Mar 1998 18:44:21 -0000 Received: from sbuamazko2ae.zko.dec.com (sbuamazko2ae.zko.dec.com [16.29.160.92]) by mail11.digital.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/WV1.0c) with ESMTP id NAA03122 for ; Mon, 2 Mar 1998 13:44:22 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199803021844.NAA03122@mail11.digital.com> Received: by sbuamazko2ae.zko.dec.com with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) id ; Mon, 2 Mar 1998 13:44:20 -0500 From: Roger Oakey To: rkba-co submit Subject: Good pro-RKBA restaurant in Colorado Springs... Date: Mon, 2 Mar 1998 13:44:16 -0500 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-rkba-co.new@majordomo.pobox.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rkba-co@majordomo.pobox.com Posted to rkba-co by Roger Oakey - ----------------------- Here's a recommendation for a good restaurant in Colorado Springs. If you happen to be traveling through Colorado Springs and you want a bite to eat, I'd recommend the Western Sizzlin at 8th and Cimmeron/Highway 24. From I25 take exit 141 (Highway 24 West exit) 0.2 miles West and it'll be on the north side of the road. So just why am I sending out a restaurant recommendation to RKBA-CO? Because of a very heartening thing that happened last night there. I'm part of a large group of instructors that once a month a teach the NRA's "Personal Protection" class. Yesterday (Sunday) was the range session and afterwards we all went to the above Western Sizzlin for dinner. There were about 16 students and 12 instructors. Because the instructors feel that not exercising a right is the easiest was to loose it, most were carrying exposed (we've been doing this for years and the folks at the Western Sizzlin know us well). This is perfectly legal as there are no restrictions on carrying exposed in Colorado Springs except for the places where the city council has imposed complete bans on firearms (creating a number of "criminal protection zones" like their city buildings and parks, but I digress). Anyway, it seems that another patron called our waitress over and *demanded* that she tell us all to go out to our cars, take off our firearms and leave them in our cars. When she responded "no" he demanded to see the manager. The manager's response was to refund the patron's money and to tell him he was free to leave if he wished to do so. The only reason we heard what had happened was that a couple of students weren't sitting with the main group and happened to be next to the patron in question and heard the whole thing transpire and told us at the main table. The waitress didn't even mention it until we asked her about it. The waitress got one heck of a tip from us! Roger Oakey Ps. This is yet another illustration of the dichotomy of thought that an anti-gunner must maintain in order to remain an anti-gun. On one hand he thought we were dangerous and that his life was threatened, which is why he didn't want us around. On the other hand, he was willing to confront (or more correctly, as a coward, was willing to send the waitress to confront) these supposedly dangerous people and ask them to leave, risking the anger of these supposedly dangerous people. It just doesn't make sense. If we were a tenth as dangerous as the anti-gunners like to say we are, they wouldn't risk harassing us all the time like they do! They KNOW we aren't a danger to them as is evidenced by their actions! 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: Mon, 02 Mar 1998 15:57:36 -0700 From: "S. Thompson" Subject: USSC Board meeting Since several of you have expressed interest in attending a USSC Board meeting .... The next meeting is TONIGHT at 6:30 PM The address is 7 N. Main St., in Kaysville, at the Crossroads of the West offices. The offices are on the SECOND floor. The doorway is between the two halves of a martial arts studio, just south of the movie theater. Apologies for the short notice - it just occurred to me now that I should post it. Board meetings are open to any interested persons. Sarah Thompson - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 03 Mar 98 06:53:00 -0700 From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: HB 304 and NRA - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 2 Mar 1998 23:08:44 -0700 From: GunFlower To: lputah@qsicorp.com Subject: Re: LPU: Romney Calls for Fusion I spoke with Rob Bishop today re: HB304. He said the NRA asked him to sponsor the bill. He said that they are worried about anti-gun people passing anti-hunting initiatives. He said the final draft of the bill was the lesser of the evils to choose from: (requiring more than 10% of the voters and putting a deadline) He said this would make it so that urban cities didn't have more power than rural...thus the change from 15 to 20 counties. I suggested to keep it to 15 but maybe just require a certain percentage to be urban and a certain percentage to be rural. He said he'd check in to it. I informed him that a lot of people are upset about this. Janalee - ---------- > From: FreeUtah > To: lputah@qsicorp.com > Subject: Re: LPU: Romney Calls for Fusion > Date: Monday, March 02, 1998 9:37 PM > During Mills Crenshaw's Monday morning program, he pledged to call Utah > GOP chair Rob Bishop to see if the Republican Party was pushing HB 304, > which increases petitioning requirements from 15 to 20 of Utah's 29 > counties. > Mills said if he got an affirmative response, he would urge his listeners > and everyone he knows not to donate any money to the Republican Party. > I don't know what Mills found out, but I do know that Speaker Mel Brown > supports the bill, as does the Utah Shooting Sports Council, for which > Rob Bishop is a lobbyist. > Scooter! - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 03 Mar 1998 08:48:27 -0700 From: DAVID SAGERS Subject: Re: Rob Bishop re: HB 304 -Forwarded Received: from shire.coloc.XMISSION.com by legacy.derail.org (NTList 3.02.13) id ta535983; Tue, 3 Mar 1998 07:37:58 -0700 Received: from slc305.modem.xmission.com (W7RCP.pengar.com) [166.70.2.121] by hobbiton.shire.net with smtp (Exim 1.82 #1) id 0y9spT-000473-00; Tue, 3 Mar 1998 07:38:00 -0700 From: "Allen Leigh" To: discussion@derail.org Date: Tue, 3 Mar 1998 07:41:12 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Rob Bishop re: HB 304 Priority: normal In-reply-to: <13034597002032@lgcy.com> Message-Id: X-Info: Evaluation version at legacy.lgcy.com X-ListMember: dsagers@ci.west-valley.ut.us [discussion@derail.org] > >> I spoke with Rob Bishop today re: HB304. He said the NRA asked him to > >> sponsor the bill. He said that they are worried about anti-gun people > >> passing anti-hunting initiatives. Even the NRA wants to use government to force their ideas on others! When one is afraid of the people, you restrict the people. :-( Oh, I forgot, it's ok to use governmental force because my ideas are "right" and other people are "wrong". It's only wrong to use governmental force to enforce wrong ideas...... If the anti-hunters can get more people to sign petitions and to vote, then they should get their ideas passed. That's the way freedom is, folks! /Allen - -------- You're already a Libertarian in your heart, why not at the voting booth? - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Mar 1998 10:57:45 -0500 From: "Chad Leigh, Pengar Enterprises Inc and Shire.Net" Subject: Re: Rob Bishop re: HB 304 -Forwarded >Even the NRA wants to use government to force their ideas on others! >When one is afraid of the people, you restrict the people. :-( > >Oh, I forgot, it's ok to use governmental force because my ideas are >"right" and other people are "wrong". It's only wrong to use >governmental force to enforce wrong ideas...... > >If the anti-hunters can get more people to sign petitions and to >vote, then they should get their ideas passed. That's the way >freedom is, folks! > >/Allen > >-------- >You're already a Libertarian in your heart, why not >at the voting booth? > That is NOT the way Freedom is. Freedom is when the government CANNOT have its ways, either good or bad. Democracy is mob rule and not freedom. Chad - --------------------------------------------------------------- Chad Leigh Pengar Enterprises, Inc and Shire.Net chad@pengar.com info@pengar.com info@shire.net Full service WWW services from just space to complete sites. Low cost virtual servers. DB integration. Tango. Email forwarding -- Permanent Email Addresses. POP3 and IMAP Email Accounts. mailto:info@shire.net for any of these. - --------------------------------------------------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 03 Mar 1998 09:57:36 -0700 From: "S. Thompson" Subject: Re: Rob Bishop re: HB 304 -Forwarded > >That is NOT the way Freedom is. Freedom is when the government CANNOT have >its ways, either good or bad. Democracy is mob rule and not freedom. > >Chad > THANK YOU CHAD!! Sarah - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 03 Mar 1998 10:54:52 -0700 From: "S. Thompson" Subject: USSC Legislative ALERT! Less than TWO DAYS LEFT! HB 304 - Initiative Amendments was defeated in the Senate, 9-19-1. There is currently an effort to resurrect this bill. (I don't know how that's done - don't ask!) The official position of USSC is to SUPPORT this bill. Please contact your SENATOR and request that s/he support this legislation. This will probably be decided TODAY, so please act quickly. (If you're one of the people who wrote to say you oppose this bill, please ignore this request! ) HB 343 - Range Protection (Substitute) is in TROUBLE. I can't get a recent update off the Web, but according to Rob Bishop it is in the Senate, and may not reach a vote. PLEASE CONTACT YOUR SENATOR and request that s/he SUPPORT this legislation - THIS SESSION. SB 182 - Restriction on Government Collecting Monies for Groups is also in trouble in the House. Although this is not strictly a firearms bill, the official position of USSC is to SUPPORT this bill. Please contact your REPRESENTATIVE and request that s/he support this bill. HB 328 - Public Office Misconduct - This is also not a firearms bill, but the opinion of the Board of USSC is that elected officials should be penalized for failing to take an oath of officeNo current status on this one, but presumably still before the Senate. Please contact your SENATOR and request that s/he OPPOSE this bill. Representatives may be contacted by calling 801-538-1029 or 800-662-3367. Other contact info is at http://www.le.state.ut.us/house/html/members.htm Senators may be contacted by calling 801-538-1035 or 800-953-8824 Other contact info is at http://www.senate.le.state.ut.us/roster.htm GOOD NEWS! SB 140, which provides that a concealed carry permit shall be good for FIVE years instead of the current two, was passed, and has been sent to the Governor. SB 141, which allows a concealed carry permit to be used instead of a background check when purchasing a firearm (thus saving the paperwork and fee), was also passed and has been sent to the Governor. Thanks to Sen. Michael Waddoups for successfully carrying both of these bills! As always, thank you for your support! More to follow on delegate training, contacting the governor, Federal S. 10, the new provisions of Brady, etc. Stay tuned! Next Board meeting and legislative wrap-up, Monday, March 9 at 6:30 PM 7 N. Main Street, Kaysville Sarah Thompson for USSC 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 (w), 364-0412 (h), 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: Tue, 03 Mar 1998 12:27:02 -0700 From: Will Thompson Subject: Re: Rob Bishop re: HB 304 -Forwarded DAVID SAGERS wrote: > > From: "Allen Leigh" > > If the anti-hunters can get more people to sign petitions and to > vote, then they should get their ideas passed. That's the way > freedom is, folks! > > /Allen > > -------- > You're already a Libertarian in your heart, why not > at the voting booth? > I thought "Libertarians" took the idea of constitutionality and the idea that this is a representative republic (not a mobocracy) seriously... Looks like i'm still a _l_ibertarian as opposed to _L_ibertarian if mob-rule is really what _L_ibertarianism's all about. will - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Mar 1998 15:40:25 -0700 From: chardy@ES.COM (Charles Hardy) Subject: Re: Rob Bishop re: HB 304 -Forwarded On Tue, 03 Mar 1998, Will Thompson posted: >I thought "Libertarians" took the idea of constitutionality >and the idea that this is a representative republic (not >a mobocracy) seriously... > >Looks like i'm still a _l_ibertarian as opposed to _L_ibertarian >if mob-rule is really what _L_ibertarianism's all about. > >will > I believe someone has already responded to Allen's post, but "Libertarians" do take constitutionality and republicanism seriously. Rights are not subject to majority vote. - -- 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: Wed, 04 Mar 1998 09:41:25 -0700 From: Will Thompson Subject: [Fwd: Shortish op-ed on concealed carry] Received: from ns.phbtsus.com by toro.phbtsus.com with SMTP (1.38.193.4/16.2) id AA15858; Tue, 3 Mar 1998 20:41:13 -0700 Return-Path: Received: from ssiinc.com by ns.phbtsus.com with SMTP ($Revision: 1.37.109.9 $/16.2) id AA0547851609; Tue, 3 Mar 1998 20:25:13 -0700 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by wanderer.ssi (8.8.7/8.8.7) id TAA07162; Tue, 3 Mar 1998 19:34:05 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 3 Mar 1998 19:34:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1), claiming to be "wanderer.ssiinc.com" via SMTP by localhost, id smtpdAAAa001jl; Tue Mar 3 19:33:56 1998 Message-Id: <46732D63205@law1.law.ucla.edu> Errors-To: volokh@law.ucla.edu Reply-To: firearmsreg@ssiinc.com Originator: firearmsreg@ssiinc.com Sender: firearmsreg@ssiinc.com Precedence: bulk From: "Eugene Volokh" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Shortish op-ed on concealed carry X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Reposted with permission. I suspect those on this list already know most of the facts chronicled here, but I thought it might still be useful for those who like to forward these sorts of things. - ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- Date sent: Sun, 01 Mar 1998 20:56:47 -0500 To: darvon@halcyon.com, cright@flash.net From: Center Right Subject: CENTER-RIGHT Issue 1, March 2, 1998 CENTER-RIGHT, a free weeklyish e-newsletter of centrist, conservative, and libertarian ideas Issue 1, March 2, 1998 Over 1100 subscribers PLEASE FEEL FREE TO FORWARD THIS to anyone you think might be interested. Subscription and unsubscription instructions at the bottom. ================================================================= No Smoking Guns: Answering Objections to Right-to-Carry Laws [1100 words] National Center for Policy Analysis, Brief Analysis No. 246 (by Morgan Reynolds & H. Sterling Burnett): Since 1986 the number of states in which it is legal to carry concealed weapons has grown from nine to 31, representing 49 percent of the country's population. Should we feel safer? Opponents of right-to-carry laws predicted a sharp decline in public safety because minor incidents would escalate into killings and more children would be victimized by more guns in irresponsible hands. Further, critics claimed that criminals would be undeterred by any increase in armed citizens. Indeed, they claimed that right-to-carry laws would increase crime rather than deter it. Experience has proven them wrong. What objections do the critics offer? Objection #1: Citizens are safe enough without handguns. Criminals commit 10 million violent and 30 million property crimes a year. Hospital emergency rooms treat an estimated 1.4 million people a year for injuries inflicted in violent attacks, according to a recent Department of Justice study. Since the U.S. Supreme Court and lower courts have held that the police are not obligated to protect individuals from crime, citizens are ultimately responsible for their own defense. Carrying a handgun allows millions to effectively provide for their own protection. Objection #2: Concealed weapons do not deter crime. In choosing their crimes, criminals weigh the prospective costs against the benefits. If criminals suspect that the costs will be too high, they are less likely to commit a crime. The possibility of a concealed weapon tilts the odds against the criminal and in favor of the victim. A survey of 1,847 felons in 10 states found them more concerned about meeting an armed victim than running into the police. Their concern is well founded. Victims use handguns an estimated 1.9 million times each year in self-defense against an attack by another person, according to a survey conducted by Florida State University criminologist Gary Kleck. Studies have found that robbery and rape victims who resist with a gun cut the risks of injury in half. Moreover, a study by economists John Lott and David Mustard of the University of Chicago, published in the January 1997 Journal of Legal Studies, examined the impact of concealed carry permits. Using data from all 3,054 U.S. counties between 1977 and 1992, the study found that: * Concealed handgun laws reduced murder by 8.5 percent, rape by 5 percent and severe assault by 7 percent. * Had right-to-carry prevailed throughout the country, 1,600 fewer murders, 4,200 fewer rapes and 60,000 fewer severe assaults would have occurred during those 15 years. In addition, the deterrent effect of concealed handgun laws proved highest in counties with high crime rates. For example, FBI statistics showed that in counties with populations of more than 200,000 (typically the counties with the highest rates of violent crime), laws allowing concealed carry produced a 13 percent drop in the murder rate and a 7 percent decline in rapes. Case Study: Vermont. Vermont has long had the least restrictive firearms carry laws, allowing citizens to carry guns either openly or concealed without any permit. Vermont also has maintained one of the lowest violent crime rates in the country. For example: * In 1980, when murders and robberies in the U.S. had soared to an average of 10 and 251 per 100,000 population, respectively, Vermont's murder rate was 22 percent of the national rate and its robbery rate was 15 percent. * In 1996 Vermont's rates remained among the lowest in the country at 25 percent of the national rate for homicide and 8 percent for robbery. Objection #3: Right-to-carry laws boost killings on impulse. Widespread gun availability was supposed to lead to a "wild- west" mentality with more shootings and deaths as people vented their anger with pistols instead of fists. Yet FBI data show that, as a share of all homicides, killings that resulted from arguments declined. In addition: * Dade County, Fla., kept meticulous records for six years, and of 21,000 permit holders, none was known to have injured an innocent person. * Since Virginia passed a right-to-carry law, more than 50,000 permits have been issued, not one permit holder has been convicted of a crime and violent crime has dropped. Moreover, those who have broken the rules have lost their privilege to carry a gun. * Texas has revoked or suspended nearly 300 permits for minor violations like failure to conceal or carrying a gun in a bar. * Between 1987 and 1995, Florida issued nearly 300,000 permits, but revoked only 19 because the permit holder had committed a crime. That's one crime per 14,000 permit holders during a nine-year period, an incredibly low rate compared to a criminal arrest rate of one per 14 Americans age 15 and older each year. Objection #4: Concealed carry puts guns in untrained hands. Before issuing a concealed carry permit, most states require that the applicant prove he or she has been thoroughly trained, with: * 10 to 15 hours emphasizing conflict resolution. * A pre-test and a final test covering the laws of self- defense and the consequences of misuse of deadly force. * A stress on gun safety in the classroom and on the firing range. * A stringent shooting accuracy test which applicants must pass each time they renew their permit. Of course, a person who has only a split second to decide whether to use deadly force can make a mistake. However, only about 30 such mistaken civilian shootings occur nationwide each year. The police kill in error three times as often. Objection #5: Concealed carry increases accidental gun deaths. The Lott-Mustard study found no increase in accidental shootings in counties with "shall issue" right-to-carry laws, where authorities have to issue the permit to all who meet the criteria. Nor have other studies. Nationally, there are about 1,400 accidental firearms deaths each year -- far fewer than the number of deaths attributable to medical errors or automobile accidents. The national death rate from firearms has declined even while firearm ownership has almost doubled in the last 20 years (figure at http://www.ncpa.org/ba/gif/firearms.gif), and 22 more states have liberalized right-to-carry laws: * The fatal firearm accident rate has declined to about .5 per 100,000 people -- a decrease of more than 19 percent in the last decade. * The number of fatal firearms-related accidents among children fell to an all-time low of 185 in 1994, a 64 percent decline since 1975. Conclusion. Concealed carry laws have not contributed to a big increase in gun ownership. Nor has allowing citizens the right to carry firearms for self-protection led to the negative consequences claimed by critics. In fact, these laws have lowered violent crime rates and increased the general level of knowledge concerning the rights, responsibilities and laws of firearm ownership. Putting unarmed citizens at the mercy of armed and violent criminals was never a good idea. Now that the evidence is in, we know that concealed carry is a social good. This Brief Analysis was prepared by Morgan Reynolds, Director of the NCPA Criminal Justice Center, and H. Sterling Burnett, Policy Analyst with the NCPA. Original document is on the Web at http://www.ncpa.org/ba/ba246.html ================================================================= More on this topic: "Myths About Gun Control," also co-written by Morgan Reynolds of the NCPA, http://www.ncpa.org/studies/s176/s176.html NRA Web site, http://www.nra.org Handgun Control, Inc. Web site, http://www.handguncontrol.org (temporarily down when checked on Thursday, February 26). Second Amendment law library, http://www.2ndlawlib.org "The Commonplace Second Amendment," a law review article by your humble editor, forthcoming in the NYU Law Review, http://www.law.ucla.edu/faculty/volokh/common.htm ================================================================= This list is edited by Eugene Volokh, who teaches constitutional law and copyright law at UCLA Law School (http://www.law.ucla.edu/faculty/volokh), and organized with the help of Terry Wynn and the Federalist Society. To subscribe, send a message containing the text (NOT the subject line) SUBSCRIBE CENTER-RIGHT to cright@flash.net To unsubscribe, send a message containing the text (NOT the subject line) UNSUBSCRIBE CENTER-RIGHT to cright@flash.net CENTER-RIGHT, a low-traffic, high-quality electronic newsletter of centrist, conservative, and libertarian ideas. - --------------------------------------------------------------------- Eugene Volokh, UCLA Law School, (310) 206-3926 fax -7010 405 Hilgard Ave., L.A., CA 90095 - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 10:30:47 -0700 From: chardy@ES.COM (Charles Hardy) Subject: CCW around UofU. - ----BEGIN FORWARDED MESSGE---- - ---------- From: Chris Kierst To: lputah@qsicorp.com Subject: LPU: URGENT: SB57 WITHDRAWN! -Reply Date: Tue, Mar 3, 1998, 2:43 PM I should like to add that Jim requested that I check with the Sheriff to see if it was possible to show the area around the UofU to be a dangerous area. I learned several things with this arcane drill. First, that their GIS capabilities are relatively new to their functions and they don't have much available yet (I don't know that GIS is even able to benefit the cop on the street in real time in a meaningful way at this time). Secondly, as is understandable, they are leary of producing crime-related maps for the general public (I wasn't asking for that anyway) because of the expense. Thirdly, the crime related maps they have produced are done for what are called "community council areas" (city councilperson districts). It turns out that they are not responsible for reporting on crime in the area of the U anyway, the city is. The city law enforcement GIS is still also in its infancy. The officers are actually kinda leary of it, especially if it is coupled w/ GPS (I don't see why considering y2k; "And who will guard the guards?") They use a grid system with each cell of the grid a 4 block by 4 block area. In the 16 grid cell area surrounding and including the U grounds in 1996 there were (rough count): 2 drive bys 81 drug busts ("drug cases") 14 "gang related cases" 11 rapes 24 robberies 33 aggravated assaults (over twice the 1995 tally) 225 residential burglaries 46 business burglaries 4 arsons no killings in 1996 but one in 1995 and a partridge in a pear tree The area thus defined is the area from 800 east to 2400 east and from 400 north to 1200 south. The area is clearly the eastern marginal area of the inner city high crime zone based on distribution of occurances. Are there higher crime areas? Definitely! But the area around the U is definitely anomalous compared to the areas north, south and east. The west and south tiers of grid cells are particularly rough (by East H. S.). I can see no reason for not packing heat in the U area. It is perfectly reasonable. Data available upon request for review. - ----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. "Those who have long enjoyed such privileges as we enjoy forget in time that men have died to win them." -- Franklin D. Roosevelt - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 11:30:10 -0700 From: chardy@ES.COM (Charles Hardy) Subject: [Vin_Suprynowicz@lvrj.com: March 15 column - inconvenient reality] - ----BEGIN FORWARDED MESSGE---- FROM MOUNTAIN MEDIA FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE DATED MARCH 15, 1998 THE LIBERTARIAN, By Vin Suprynowicz If reality is inconvenient ... ignore it Since last month's "Great Las Vegas Anthrax Caper" turned out to be a false alarm, a combination of the FBI going off half-cocked and the press happily lapping up any libel they're handed (so long as it supposedly involves "white supremacist militia" types), the government couldn't possibly use the now-discredited "threat" of an anthrax attack by a bunch of Nevada Mormon bishops to justify, say, setting up a new police paramilitary training academy, teaching cops how to dress up like Army Special Forces and accustoming them to launching SWAT raids against domestic "terrorist" targets INSIDE THE UNITED STATES ... could they? Brett Davis of the Newhouse News Service reported in early March: "WASHINGTON -- Justice Department officials could get the nod as early as this week to begin setting up a domestic terrorism training center at Fort McClellan in Anniston, Ala. "The $2 million in start-up funding for the National Center for Domestic Preparedness, as it is called, has already been approved by Congress. "As soon as Attorney General Janet Reno decides which Justice Department office will have jurisdiction over the school ... federal and local officials will begin setting it up. It could begin its first classes by June. " 'The timing could not be better,' said Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., a chief sponsor of the new school. "This new mission at Fort McClellan, which is closing as a military base at the end of next year, is intended to train the 'first responders' at sites of terrorist attacks, including incidents involving chemical or biological weapons. "The recent arrest of two men in Las Vegas accused of planning an anthrax attack on the New York subway system has heightened interest in defending against such attacks. That case was a false alarm -- the anthrax in question turned out to be a harmless anthrax vaccine. "Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., who has oversight of the Justice Department through his seat on the Judiciary Committee, said real attacks are probably just a matter of time. ... "The base's tunnels and other structures can be used to simulate subways, shopping malls or other urban settings, giving the training added realism. "Firefighters, police and emergency medical technicians from around the country are expected to enroll in the five-day training sessions. ... # # # Meantime, at the conclusion of the Steven Spielberg film "Amistad," the African protagonist is seen aboard another ship, as land rises to the east. The irony of Cinque's return to Africa, the viewers are informed, is that he learned upon his arrival that a civil war had been going on there for some time, and that many of his countrymen had, themselves, been captured and sold away. But just as Mr. Spielberg, for all his artistic brilliance, decided to rewrite history to match the prejudices of today's urban liberal audience in his "Schindler's List" (Oscar Schindler ARMED his Jewish employees when he moved them to Czechoslovakia, so they could PROTECT THEMSELVES ... though that politically significant fact was carefully deleted from the film), it turns out that was not the real irony of Cinque's return to his native land. As the distinguished American historian Samuel Eliot Morrison wrote in his "Oxford History of the American People," (New York: Oxford University Press, 1965), page 520: "The most famous case involving slavery, until eclipsed by Dred Scott's, was that of the Amistad in 1839. She was a Spanish slave ship carrying 53 newly imported Negroes who were being moved from Havana to another Cuban port. Under the leadership of an upstanding Negro named Cinque, they mutinied and killed captain and crew. Then, ignorant of navigation, they had to rely on a white man whom they had spared to sail the ship. "He stealthily steered north, the Amistad was picked up off Long Island by a United States warship, taken into New Haven, and with her cargo placed in charge of the federal marshal. "Then what a legal hassle! ... Lewis Tappan and Roger Sherman Baldwin, a Connecticut abolitionist, undertook to free them by legal process, and the case was appealed to the Supreme Court. John Quincy Adams, persuaded to act as their attorney, argued that the Negroes be freed, on the ground that the slave trade was illegal both by American and Spanish law, and that mankind had a natural right to freedom. "The court with a majority of Southerners, was so impressed by the old statesman's eloquence that it ordered Cinque and the other Negroes set free, and they were returned to Africa. "The ironic epilogue is that Cinque, once home, set himself up as a slave trader." If history is more interesting than fiction, perhaps it's because the people now in charge of doctoring up our fiction have no real taste for the delicious ironies of history, which are so often at odds with the pompous simple-mindedness of propaganda. 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. *** 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. "...The right of the people peacefully to assemble for lawful purposes existed long before the adoption of the Constitution of the United States. In fact, it is and always has been one of the attributes of a free government. It `derives its source,' to use the language of Chief Justice Marshall, in Gibbons v Ogden, 9 Wheat., 211, `from those laws whose authority is acknowledged by civilized man throughout the world.' It is found wherever civilization exists. It was not, therefore, a right granted to the people by the Constitution... The second and tenth counts are equally defective. The right there specified is that of `bearing arms for a lawful purpose.' This is not a right granted by the constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependant upon that instrument for its existence. The Second Amendment declares that it shall not infringed; but this, as has been seen, means no more than it shall not be infringed by Congress. This is one of the amendments that has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the National Government..." UNITED STATES v. CRUIKSHANK; 92 US 542; (1875) - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Mar 1998 12:46:17 -0700 From: DAVID SAGERS Subject: GSL> NEAL KNOX REPORT -Forwarded Received: (qmail 15036 invoked by uid 516); 4 Mar 1998 19:39:21 -0000 Delivered-To: gsl@majordomo.pobox.com Received: (qmail 14768 invoked from network); 4 Mar 1998 19:39:01 -0000 Received: from in4.doitnow.com (207.98.156.13) by majordomo.pobox.com with SMTP; 4 Mar 1998 19:39:01 -0000 Received: from default (dialup5-1-36.doitnow.com [207.211.43.36]) by in4.doitnow.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) with SMTP id MAA09188; Wed, 4 Mar 1998 12:38:45 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980304124302.006b3cfc@mail.doitnow.com> X-Sender: danda@mail.doitnow.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 04 Mar 1998 12:43:02 -0700 To: PRN@airgunhq.com From: danda Subject: GSL> NEAL KNOX REPORT Cc: gsl@listbox.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-gsl@listbox.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: gsl@listbox.com - ----------------------------------------- http://GunsSaveLives.com NEAL KNOX REPORT The Heston File By NEAL KNOX WASHINGTON, D.C. (March 2) -- The Lyndon B. Johnson Presidential Library in Austin today confirmed that NRA First Vice President Charlton Heston actively worked with the Johnson Administration in passing the 1968 Gun Control Act. Heston, who is in line to be elected NRA President in June if elected to the Board in the election now underway, has served as a public spokesman for NRA for several years. Heston's role in expanding the 1968 Safe Streets Act to prohibit the interstate sale or transfer of rifles and shotguns came to light about two weeks ago when the text of two LBJ Library documents began circulating on the Internet. The documents were so historically accurate that they refreshed memories of the fury of our battle against the Gun Control Act, but I didn't recall the huge Hollywood effort having included Heston. I worried that an enemy might have added Heston's name in an effort to torpedo his NRA fundraising. But 13 pages documenting Heston's gun control efforts are in the LBJ Library, White House Central Files "SP" and "LE," Boxes 5 and 80. On June 12, 1968, White House Deputy Special Counsel Larry Levinson sent a memo to a speech writer: "At the President's suggestion, Jack Valenti has agreed to hold a luncheon in Los Angeles ... June 17, at which a number of famous movie actors -- particularly those who play cowboys -- will speak out in favor of the President's gun control legislation. "For this luncheon, we need two pithy, one-page statements which will be read by two of the 'cowboys' (probably Charlton Heston ...), supporting the President's Gun Control Bill." That same day Levinson sent a telegram to Heston at his Beverly Hills home with a proposed statement that the Safe Streets Act "is only a half-way measure. It covers only handguns - -- but fails to include shotguns and rifles. ... As you know, a mail order rifle was used to assassinate President John F. Kennedy, and a rifle was used to kill Dr. Martin Luther King." On June 18, 1968 Levinson sent a memo to President Johnson: "Through Jack Valenti's good work, five movie actors will appear tonight on the Joey Bishop show ... to strongly support your gun control proposal. The actors involved are Gregory Peck, Charlton Heston, Hugh O'Brian [sic], James Stewart and Kirk Douglas. "They will read a very tough statement which we prepared here applauding your action in calling for strict gun curbs." Two days later, on June 20, Special Assistant to the President Joe Califano sent President Johnson a copy of a statement "which Hugh O'Brien read on the Joey Bishop Show last Tuesday. This was a statement subscribed to by Kirk Douglas, James Stewart, Gregory Peck and Charleton [sic] Heston and has been widely circulated throughout the country. "The statement was prepared by Levinson and Middleton and was 'slipped' to Hugh O'Brien through Jack Valenti." The statement reminded Joey Bishop's audience that "Two weeks ago, Robert F. Kennedy became one of thousands of Americans struck down by an assassin's bullet." It added: "The Congress has recently given us some protection against pistols in the wrong hands. But that's not enough ... not nearly enough. The carnage will not stop until there is effective control over sale of rifles and shotguns. "President John F. Kennedy was murdered by a rifle. "Martin Luther King was murdered by a rifle. "Medgar Evers was murdered by a rifle." On June 18 Hollywood public relations consultant Dick McKay wrote Califano that "Charlton, Gregory [Peck] and Hugh personally planted this statement with the bureau chiefs at AP and UPI. They were greeted warmly and ... (t)he AP also photographed the trio." Heston's gun control efforts are also found on Page 10 of the October 1968 American Rifleman. The head of a Hollywood anti-gun group had praised Heston as one of "little more than a handful" of "diehards" which included Warren Beatty, Candice [sic] Bergen, Marlon Brando, O'Brien and Jill St. John. These events put fresh light on Heston's May 6, 1997 statements about some guns being "inappropriate for private ownership." We now have a better understanding of what he means when he talks about bringing NRA into "the mainstream." And now I know why I've never seen a picture of him with anything other than a flintlock rifle or a double-barrel shotgun. Voters now have a clear choice in the election -- Heston's slate or the Second Amendment patriots he imperiously tells you to "Vote Against." --- For a list of the candidates Neal supports, see his "Knox Report" in the ballot issue of the March NRA magazines. Knox also urges a "Yes" vote on the member-petitioned "Financial Reporting and Officer Good Conduct" Bylaw amendment. ## # Dennis - -------------------------- GunsSaveLives Internet Discussion List This list is governed by an acceptable use policy: http://www.wizard.net/~kc/policy.html or available upon request. To unsubscribe send a message to majordomo@listbox.com with the following line in the body: unsubscribe gsl GUNSSAVELIVES (GSL) IS A PRIVATE UNMODERATED LIST. THE OWNER TAKES NO RESPONSIBILTY FOR CONTENT. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. - - ------------------------------ End of utah-firearms-digest V2 #31 **********************************