From: owner-utah-firearms-digest@lists.xmission.com (utah-firearms-digest) To: utah-firearms-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: utah-firearms-digest V2 #32 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 Thursday, March 5 1998 Volume 02 : Number 032 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 04 Mar 1998 15:11:09 -0700 From: DAVID SAGERS Subject: Phillips 66 jumps on the anti-self-defense bandwagon -Forwarded Received: (qmail 7651 invoked by uid 516); 4 Mar 1998 21:47:29 -0000 Delivered-To: rkba-co@majordomo.pobox.com Received: (qmail 6403 invoked from network); 4 Mar 1998 21:46:23 -0000 Received: from mail13.digital.com (192.208.46.30) by majordomo.pobox.com with SMTP; 4 Mar 1998 21:46:23 -0000 Received: from sbuamazko2ae.zko.dec.com (sbuamazko2ae.zko.dec.com [16.29.160.92]) by mail13.digital.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/WV1.0c) with ESMTP id QAA22764 for ; Wed, 4 Mar 1998 16:46:22 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199803042146.QAA22764@mail13.digital.com> Received: by sbuamazko2ae.zko.dec.com with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) id ; Wed, 4 Mar 1998 16:45:20 -0500 From: Roger Oakey To: rkba-co submit Subject: Phillips 66 jumps on the anti-self-defense bandwagon Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 16:45:15 -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 - ----------------------- First Dennys, now Phillips 66. Phillips Petroleum (Phillips 66 gas stations) in a recent "sign package" mailed out to retail gas outlets nationwide included the following sign to be posted in all their stores: NOTICE Weapons, Concealed or otherwise are prohibited on these premises Phillips Petroleum Company Note that by posting this sign Phillips Petroleum has decided that the following three statements *must* be true (otherwise why post it?): 1) A robber or murderer willing to threaten or use deadly force against a station's attendant and uncaring of the multitude of laws and harsh penalties imposed for robbing and murdering will see this sign, obey it, and rob someone else. 2) The people who will obey the sign and the honor system it relies on are the real threat to the attendants. 3) There is no difference between a law abiding concealed carry holder and a murdering robber. I especially find the last statement insulting to me. The reality of the situation is as follows: 1) By posting the signs, a potential robber and/or murder will know that the attendant and customers are unarmed, and therefore the station is a safe place to attack (for him, that is). This is the classic "criminal safe zone" mentality that protects the criminal and endangers the law abiding. 2) Law-abiding concealed carry holders, whose ultimate goal is to avoid situations where they may need to deploy their firearm will avoid Phillips 66 stations because of the increased risk posed to themselves (because as stated above the stations now advertise that they're safe places to rob). 3) Concealed carry holders and others who believe in self-defense will avoid Phillips 66 because they are insulted by being equated with murderers and robbers. I urge you to pick up the phone and call Phillips 66's CEO Wayne Allen at 918-661-4467 and tell him what you think of his companies "Criminal protection and sacrificial attendant" policy as well as writing him at: CEO Wayne Allen 18 Phillips Building Bartlesville, OK 74004 Roger Oakey 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: Wed, 04 Mar 1998 15:31:19 -0700 From: "S. Thompson" Subject: Re: Phillips 66 jumps on the anti-self-defense bandwagon At 03:11 PM 3/4/98 -0700, you wrote: >First Dennys, now Phillips 66. > > > >Phillips Petroleum (Phillips 66 gas >stations) in a recent "sign > >package" mailed out to retail gas outlets >nationwide included the > >following sign to be posted in all their >stores: > > > > NOTICE > > > > Weapons, Concealed > > >or otherwise > > are prohibited > > on these >premises > > > > Phillips Petroleum Company I've been following up on this situation in Utah. I spoke with a regional or district manager (not sure of his exact title). His name is Lamar Hoskin, phone 801-571-4066. Mr. Hoskin told me that the directive came from the national HQ in Oklahoma. He said he was unaware that posting such a sign was illegal in Utah. I briefly explained that our concealed carry law specifies "without restriction". Mr. Hoskin seemed concerned, receptive and interested. He said he would check with the national office and get back to me. That was only Monday, so it's a little too soon to expect a response. I think we need to give Phillips 66 a chance to respond before making a huge production out of it. If they voluntarily take down the signs, great. If they don't, well, we already know how to deal with that. In the meantime, it certainly wouldn't hurt to politely let Mr. Hoskin, or station managers, know that their policy is illegal and unacceptable to law-abiding gun owners. Sarah (for myself) - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 16:44:46 -0700 From: chardy@ES.COM (Charles Hardy) Subject: Anti-gunners and the 'lympics <<>> OK, so now the 'lympics are going to be used as the excuse to restrict CCW. Un-friggggin-believable. These people campaigned for the games becuase Utah was such a great place and we wanted to show it off to the world. Only now that they have them, they are suddenly embarrased by our liquar laws, our mormons, our history, and our guns. Hell, seems what they meant was the landscape is fine but there is absolutely nothing about our culture worth showing off. I admit we aint perfect, but some of us like it here a whole lot more than other places we've been. Below is an article from today's DesNews wherein Beattie, Steiner, and even our "allie" Bishop all agree that CCW will be limited prior to 2002 to accomodate the games and the international community. My attitude is if they don't like our mormons, history, or guns they can stay the hell home. <<>> DEEP BREATH.... In an unashamed attempt to pre-bias your view, I've included a letter to the editor from a couple of weeks ago. Seems to me that along with freedom of religion, the U.S. is also known for our private ownership of guns. I think that should be shown off. If legitimate security concerns or simple politics demand that guns not be allowed in Olympic venues, we need to make sure that everyplace guns are going to be prohibited has controlled access, metal detectors, armed guards AND secure storage facilities for legal gun carriers who do not wish to be disarmed from point of departure. Let the international community see a few CCW permit holders and maybe even unlicensed open carriers placing their guns into lockers and then retrieving them as they leave. The thought reminds me of a few years back when the USSR gymnastics team came to what was then SUSC. Their security people were freaked at all the people driving trucks around Cedar City with guns in the back window. The Sherrif's response to them was, "Calm down and quit worrrying. These are good people." Deseret News Archives, [Image] Friday, February 20, 1998 [Image] [Image] S.L. has lots to offer Games [Image] [Image] [Image] [Image] Deedee Corradini looked at the 1,350-year-old Zenkoji Temple and said in awe, ``This is something we just can't replicate. We've got to decide what will be the spirit of the Salt Lake Games.'' [Image] Look up, Deedee. The spirit is there, you just can't see it. The magnificent temple in your city may be comparatively young, but it took 40 years of backbreaking toil to build it. The story behind this state is wrought with blood, sweat and tears. Utah is all about what America is all about - religious freedom. [Image] We have four years to give Utah a good housecleaning. Company's coming. But in so doing don't sweep our precious heritage under the rug. Someone is sure to find it and wonder why you are hiding it. I'm not suggesting we make it a Mormon program. Diversity is what makes this country great. But don't lean so far away from our culture that you fall on your face. I do not understand why it was necessary to hire a woman from California (at $60,000 a year) to coordinate Ogden's Olympics related activities. There is so much talent here in Utah. Did you see the spectacular 24th of July celebration in Provo? [Image] Our Tabernacle Choir is known and loved throughout the world. I can bear their voices singing, ``Glory, glory, hallelujah!'' Use them. Let everyone who will join in. [Image] There are thousands of children all over the world who sing the song, ``I am a child of God.'' It isn't a song only for LDS. It is for anyone who believes in God. Let the African children, the Mexican children, the Jewish children, American children of all races sing. Let them sing in the beautiful Church of the Madeleine if you please. [Image] In the opening ceremony a replica of the Statue of Liberty could rise from an elegantly wrapped gift box. That would make a great theme: ``America's gift to the world.'' There never has been a time when the world was more hungry for such a gift. Nor will there ever be a time when we will have a better opportunity to fill that need. A great package of liberty, freedom, love, compassion, service - God. [Image] Anne Smart-Pearce [Image] Salt Lake City [Image] [Image] [Image] © 1997 Deseret News Publishing Co. [Image] [Image] [Image] [Advertise here] [Image] Last updated 03/04/1998, 10:10:41 AM MT Pack guns to Games? Utah may alter law [Image] [Image] [Front page] By Jerry Spangler Deseret News staff writer [World & Nation] Salt Lake Olympic organizers certainly impressed an [Utah] international audience at the 1998 Winter Games in Nagano, Japan, with its display of cowboys and horses during closing [Business] ceremonies. But there is one aspect of the mythical Wild West that [Sports] could cause 2002 Winter Games organizers some very real headaches: Guns. Some 15,000 of them to be exact. [Life!] That's how many Utah citizens, give or take a few hundred, have permits to legally carry weapons under Utah [Opinion] law. And there is absolutely nothing in current Utah law that would preclude those individuals from carrying their guns [Image] into Olympic venues. "We are aware of the issue, and it is certainly a concern to us, as it is to all the federal and international security people, and to the International Olympic Committee," said Department of Public Safety Commissioner Craig Dearden, who heads up Utah's security efforts for the 2002 Games. "There is no question it would be seen as a security breach to have people carrying guns (into Olympic venues)." Republican leadership in the Legislature, as well as GOP Gov. Mike Leavitt, say changes will have to be made to Utah's liberal laws that allow virtually anyone who wants one to obtain a permit to carry a concealed weapon almost anywhere they want. Attempts this year to allow churches, schools and private businesses to prohibit guns on their premises have all been shot down by a powerful pro-gun lobby. In fact, as the 1998 session draws to a close, it is likely that no substantial changes will be made to Utah's concealed weapons laws this year. "No, I don't think it is appropriate that guns be carried into Olympic venues, and yes, there will be restrictions in place by 2002," promised Senate President Lane Beattie, R-West Bountiful. "We're talking an international situation during the Olympics, not a local situation." Leavitt agrees, calling the issue "one of dozens that will have to be solved" before the 2002 Games. "It all boils down to the issue of private property rights," he said. "Should private property owners have the right to restrict people from carrying weapons on their property? I believe there are times when private property owners should have the choice, and the Olympics would certainly be one of those times. It's a matter of principle." [Im At the heart of the debate is whether the 15,000 Utahns who have the legal right to carry concealed weapons will relinquish their rights to carry guns Olympics or not. And given the fact that attempts to amend state law to impose such restrictions have met with repeated failure, will the international Olympic community tolerate the Games being held at venues where spectators may well be armed? Current Utah law specifies that guns can be prohibited only from the airport and in designated secure areas, which are defined as governmental facilities like prisons and jails. There has been considerable debate on Capitol Hill as to whether private property owners should have the right to ban weapons from their establishments. Many Olympic venues are private facilities, while those that are government buildings are not "secure facilities" as defined under current state law. That leaves lawmakers with the prospect of amending the current law to allow private entities, businesses and governments to ban weapons — something lawmakers have been reticent to do. "By not acting on this issue, the Legislature has put private property rights into a precarious position of being secondary to the rights to carry concealed weapons," said Sen. Robert Steiner, a Salt Lake Democrat who has tried for years to limit where concealed weapons can be carried. "Maybe the Olympics situation will be the impetus for them to actually address the issue." Rob Bishop, who represents the Utah Sports Shooting Council on Capitol Hill, agreed the Olympics present a unique situation that must be addressed through legislation. And he predicted a willingness on the part of gun rights advocates to negotiate reasonable limits on concealed weapons during the Olympics. The issue of an armed citizenry is foreign to most nations participating in the Olympic Games. In Japan, for example, only a handful of people have permits to even own guns. Many European nations also have prohibited private ownership of guns except in very limited circumstances. Olympic Games are typically characterized by heavy security, including metal detectors and mandatory screening for weapons. "It will be very interesting to see how the world sees Utah if we allow anyone who wants to carry a concealed weapon during the Games," Steiner said. "I would imagine the international governments will demand that Olympic venues be secure areas." [Image] [Image] [Image] Sports + World & Nat. + Business + Features + Opinion + Front Page - -- 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 17:06:21 -0700 From: DAVID SAGERS Subject: Precedents -Forwarded Received: (from smap@localhost) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id NAA08135; Wed, 4 Mar 1998 13:29:02 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 13:29:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1) by fs1.mainstream.net via smap (V1.3) id sma008037; Wed Mar 4 13:26:53 1998 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19980304155807.008dade0@inet.skillnet.com> Errors-To: listproc@mainstream.com Reply-To: recon@inet.skillnet.com Originator: noban@mainstream.net Sender: noban@Mainstream.net Precedence: bulk From: Richard Hartman To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Precedents X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list As President Clinton urges Congress to transfer billions of dollars from working-class smokers into government coffers and lawyers' wallets, other government officials are taking aim at gun companies. "Politicians are frustrated by their failure to reduce violent crime, so they're conspiring to commit a crime of their own --shaking down gun manufacturers for millions of dollars," said Steve Dasbach, the Libertarian Party's national chairman. "They want to extort money from honest companies to pay for the crimes of street thugs." An anti-gun lawsuit -- patterned after the lucrative lawsuit against tobacco companies -- is now being considered by Philadelphia Mayor Ed Rendell, Miami Mayor Alex Penelas and Detroit Mayor Dennis Archer. Their novel legal strategy: Blaming gun manufacturers for violent crime, on the grounds that guns are a "public nuisance" and that "rogue companies" are deliberately marketing guns to criminals. The lawsuit, if filed, would force gun makers to pay the costs of prosecuting criminals, paying overtime for police and paramedics -- even cleaning up blood from crime scenes. - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Mar 98 18:41:00 -0700 From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: URGENT: SB57 WITHDRAWN! -Reply Posted to utah-firearms according to Jim Dexter's request. - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- 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 occurrences. 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. - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 09:13:19 -0700 From: DAVID SAGERS Subject: GSL> Fwd: Court Throws Out Part of Calif. Law -Forwarded Received: (qmail 21062 invoked by uid 516); 5 Mar 1998 12:32:07 -0000 Delivered-To: gsl@majordomo.pobox.com Received: (qmail 21039 invoked from network); 5 Mar 1998 12:32:03 -0000 Received: from imo21.mx.aol.com (198.81.19.148) by majordomo.pobox.com with SMTP; 5 Mar 1998 12:32:03 -0000 Received: from REBarnes50@aol.com by imo21.mx.aol.com (IMOv13.ems) id AAAKa01471 for ; Thu, 5 Mar 1998 07:31:30 -0500 (EST) From: REBarnes50 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 07:31:30 EST To: gsl@listbox.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: GSL> Fwd: Court Throws Out Part of Calif. Law Content-type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part0_889101091_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 120 Sender: owner-gsl@listbox.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: gsl@listbox.com - ----------------------------------------- http://GunsSaveLives.com This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - --part0_889101091_boundary Content-ID: <0_889101091@inet_out.mail.aol.com.1> Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII This appeared in my mailbox from AOL News. May be of interest to some of you. REBarnes - --part0_889101091_boundary Content-ID: <0_889101091@inet_out.mail.aol.com.2> Content-type: message/rfc822 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Content-disposition: inline From: AOL News Return-path: Subject: Court Throws Out Part of Calif. Law Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 06:57:54 EST Organization: AOL (http://www.aol.com) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Court Throws Out Part of Calif. Law .c The Associated Press SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) - Supporters of gun control are calling for new bans after a state appeals court dismissed part of California's assault weapons restrictions as unconstitutional. The 3rd District Court of Appeal on Wednesday struck down the heart of the 1989 law that banned 62 assault rifles, saying it violated the equal protection provisions of the Constitution because many of the banned guns are no different than guns sold legally. ``The listed guns are no more dangerous in the hands of criminals than the functionally indistinguishable guns, nor than the identical clone guns. Nor do they ... pose a greater danger of use to kill and injure human beings,'' wrote Justice Fred Morrison, according to The San Diego Union Tribune. The appeals court also suggested that the rest of the law may be unconstitutional and asked a lower court to review it. ``This is the death knell'' for the state law, said Chuck Michel, a Los Angeles attorney who represents gun maker Colt Manufacturers. ``This is a victory for any citizen who doesn't like symbolic, feel-good laws that are filled with technical flaws.'' The law was approved after a gunman armed with an assault rifle killed five students at a Stockton elementary school. The law generally bans the sale, manufacture, distribution and, in most cases, possession of a number of military-style semiautomatic rifles, pistols and shotguns. People who legally owned the guns before June 1989 were allowed to keep them if they registered the weapons with the state. Critics have argued that the law bans some guns while leaving more powerful weapons on the market. And they also said the law could lead to a ban on weapons without the knowledge of gun owners, making them unwitting felons. The justices agreed, saying the law contained a gap in its notice provisions and theoretically a person could be prosecuted before he knew that a gun he owned was illegal. Assemblyman Don Perata of Alameda said the decision underscores the need for his bill seeking to replace the law with one that defines assault weapons based on firepower and military characteristics. AP-NY-03-05-98 0655EST Copyright 1997 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without prior written authority of The Associated Press. To edit your profile, go to keyword NewsProfiles. For all of today's news, go to keyword News. - --part0_889101091_boundary-- - -------------------------- 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. - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 10:59:00 +0700 From: Thomas Allen Subject: (Fwd) Re: HB242 I have taken the liberty of sending this message from our local Senator to the group. Keep up the fight. Tom - ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- Date: Wed, 04 Mar 1998 21:02:11 -0700 From: Lyle Hillyard To: thomasa@relations.usu.edu Subject: Re: HB242 I appreciated your recent e-mail. Sen. Steiner who was going to make the amendment talked to me and I convinced him that he was only wasting his time and just creating very emotional feelings. I can tell by all the contacts I get about the C.P. law that there is a lot of misunderstanding about the law. I don't believe that the newspaper wants to correct the emotional misinformation. I am concerned that someone with a concealed weapons permit will do something stupid and make the pressure on us to change the law unbearable. >>> Thomas Allen 03/02 4:21 PM >>> Some people just will not give up a bad idea. The proposed technical corrections to the Concealed Carry Weapon law were ok until this last-minute, ill-conceived, unneccessary garbage was tacked on restricting what objects one may or may not carry into a house of worship. If the Democrats want to pass a law gutting our "shall issue" concealed carry law in Utah, let them work it through the committee process in the full light of public scrutiny. As I have observed to you before, the portion of this bill regulating what persons may carry in and around houses of worship is clearly unconstitutional. The LDS Church has already spoken about the appropriateness of carrying firearms into their churches and places of worship. All churches and synagogues can do likewise, if they feel this is an issue of concern. Members will obey, or choose not to attend. We certainly don't need the Utah legislature dictating behavior in churches. If the legislature can legislate this, they can decide to outlaw the carrying of the Book of Mormon or the Methodist Book of Discipline into a church. They can forbid the wearing of yarmulkes or baptism by sprinkling. We have wasted enough time and energy on this unneccessary and unwanted legislation for this session. Please vote no if this measure comes to a vote. Thanks for your patience with those of us who are deeply concerned about the Second Amendment. Thomas L. Allen, 140 E, 200 N, Millville - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 11:52:14 -0700 From: Will Thompson Subject: Re: CA Gun Ban Overturned (Kasler v. Lungren) Different/additional information on the Cal. ugly gun ban decision. Way to go Don, et. al. Dunno that I can agree with the "hope" bit though. Seems more like an aberration to me, but I'm a cynical cuss. BTW - It's been months since I could bring myself to read TPG...wasn't Peter once a regular contributor there? from njsp@juno.com by way of firearmsreg@ssiinc.com > > I take this as good news and gives me hope that our judiciary actually > does work. The lead plaintiff, Peter Alan Kasler, is a CA Deputy Sheriff > and Attorney and firearms instructor and author and all-around-nice-guy. > Way to go Peter! > > Peter can be e-mailed at tmi@well.com. He also runs the Threat Management > Institute. You may wish to read an interesting related web page at > http://www.scimitar.com/revolution/firearms/crime/protect.html. > > Godspeed, > > J. R. Lynch > > =========================== > MICHEL & ASSOCIATES > ATTORNEYS AT LAW > March 4, 1998 > FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE > Contact: Chuck Michel (310) 966-0069 > > APPEALS COURT OVERTURNS > ASSAULT WEAPON LAW > > Sacramento- The Third District Court of Appeal today ruled that > the 1989 Roberti-Roos Assault Weapon Control Act (the Act) is > unconstitutional. In its 51 page decision, the Court held that the list > of firearms deemed "assault weapons" was vague and violated > constitutional equal protection principals, and that other provisions of > the Act which allowed guns to be added the prohibited list violated > constitutional due process and separation of powers requirements. > > The case was brought by a consortium of law professors, doctors, > law enforcement officers, and Colt Manufacturing, a firearms maker > effected by the law. > > "This is a tremendous victory, not just for gun owners, but for > any citizen that understands the dangers of ill-conceived symbolic laws > based on emotion rather than fact," Chuck Michel, an attorney for the > plaintiffs in the case said. "The law was so poorly written and so > difficult to understand that thousands of people became felons > accidentally." > > Attorneys Don B. Kates and Stephen P. Halbrook were lead counsel > on the case, which was filed in 1989 and was largely funded by the Second > Amendment Foundation in Washington. > > The Court pointed out that "assault weapons" are not fully > automatic machine guns, which have been essentially outlawed since 1934. > Historically, the semi-automatic firearms listed as "assault weapons" > have almost never been used in crime, nor has any jurisdiction reduced > their crime rate by banning "assault weapons." Many of these firearms > are used for competitive sport target shooting and actually ideal for law > abiding citizens to defend themselves and their families when they face > riots or natural disasters. > > The text of the decision is available at > http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/opinions.cgi > > _____________________________________________________________________ > You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. > Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com > Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 15:27:37 -0700 From: DAVID SAGERS Subject: Trial of FBI Sharpshooter at Ruby Ridge -Forwarded Received: (qmail 17481 invoked by uid 516); 5 Mar 1998 18:50:38 -0000 Delivered-To: gsl@majordomo.pobox.com Received: (qmail 17249 invoked from network); 5 Mar 1998 18:50:20 -0000 Received: from xroadstx.com (HELO mail2.xroadstx.com) (208.220.74.12) by majordomo.pobox.com with SMTP; 5 Mar 1998 18:50:20 -0000 Received: from walterjr (host45.analog.xroadstx.com [208.220.74.198]) by mail2.xroadstx.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id MAA03832 for ; Thu, 5 Mar 1998 12:42:22 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <34FEF315.775C@xroadstx.com> Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 12:46:45 -0600 From: walter lee X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gsl@listbox.com Subject: Re: GSL> Re: Judge Postpones Manslaughter Trial of FBI Sharpshooter at Ruby Ridge References: <199803051652.LAA19634@indy3.indy.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-gsl@listbox.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: gsl@listbox.com - ----------------------------------------- http://GunsSaveLives.com Walter Daniels wrote: > > ----------------------------------------- http://GunsSaveLives.com > > My comments are further down (left for context). > > > By George Lardner Jr. > > > > A federal judge in Idaho yesterday postponed the manslaughter trial of FBI > > sharpshooter Lon Horiuchi for killing Vicki Weaver in the 1992 siege at > > Ruby Ridge and set a hearing to decide whether Horiuchi is immune from > > prosecution. > > > > The trial had been scheduled to begin in Boise Monday. > > > > Chief U.S. District Judge Edward J. Lodge said in a two-page order that it > > would be "a miscarriage of justice" to proceed to trial without first giving > > full consideration to Horiuchi's motion to dismiss the charge and a > > prosecution response contending that he is "not entitled to the immunity > > defense at all." > > > Horiuchi's attorneys, who are being paid by the Justice Department, argue > > that he was acting "within the scope of his authority as a federal officer" > > when the shot he fired "unintentionally struck and killed" the wife of white > > separatist Randy Weaver. > > If anyone knows sniper experts, can they be contacted to show he was _not_ > acting in official capacity? Reasoning as follows. The shot was outside > guidelines: 1)due to unknown background; 2)unarmed civilians in line of > fire; 3)excessive distance to *moving* target; 4)no officer in direct > danger. I am _not_ an expert, but these seem clear violations of both Human > Rights and reasonable sniper regulations. Violating _any_ of these, should > remove "immunity." > > >----- End Included Message ----- There is an even bigger issue that I think people are missing. There are justifications in law for taking human life. There are no justifications in law for accidents even if what you were trying to do is legal. While personally I believe that this is cold blooded murder, Hourchi has said he didn't mean to kill Vicki Weaver. As such, the shooting becomes "accidental." Manslaughter has to do with unintentional actions which result in unlawful death. How can any law protect someone from actions which are un- or ill considered? The issue here is negligence. Is the federal government saying that its laws allow its agents and employees to be negligent in performing their duties? The Feds have not disciplined Hourchi. That seems to indicate that they believe he exercised proper caution. In Texas, there are laws that protect LEOs from civil suits for negligence but not from gross negligence--an aggravated from of negligence involving a willful disregard of proper precautions. However, Texas law also says that criminal liability exists for those who accidently kill or injure someone negligently as they are acting in a justified manner against another party. Just how does Idaho law read? What does Federal law say? This gets curiouser and curiouser. Walter Lee - -------------------------- 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. - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 15:30:55 -0700 From: DAVID SAGERS Subject: CA AW legislation -Forwarded Received: (from smap@localhost) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id PAA20811; Thu, 5 Mar 1998 15:27:37 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 15:27:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1) by fs1.mainstream.net via smap (V1.3) id sma020754; Thu Mar 5 15:27:32 1998 Message-Id: <199803052003.MAA23178@unixm3.wellsfargo.com> Errors-To: listproc@mainstream.com Reply-To: lews@wellsfargo.com Originator: noban@mainstream.net Sender: noban@Mainstream.net Precedence: bulk From: lews@wellsfargo.com To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: CA AW legislation X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list I'm sure most of you know the a good chunk of the CA AW ban was struck down yesterday by the CA Court of Appeals and the balance has been referred back down to Superior Court for review. However, the anti's are spinning this defeat as all the more reason CA should pass AB23, which would ban even more guns based on description, rather than specific models. AB23 is moving right on through the State Senate and Assembly and is predicted to probably end up on Gov. Wilson's desk fairly soon. We need to get folks to contact the Governor's office and request he veto AB23 should it reach him. I've been trying to get the word out as much as I can on the wide range of guns that will be covered under AB23 to get more people off their butts and motivate them to contact their State legislators and the Governor. Many uninformed gun owners have no idea their gun may be defined as an AW under AB23. I've been telling my friends, folks up at the range, etc., that their gun or a gun they may want may be defined as an AW and registration will be required, possession/transport/usage will be limited, future sale banned. Some examples are: In addition to the currently banned AW's, ALL AR15's including Sporters/clones, AR10 variants, Stoner SR-25's, all HK-91/FN-FAL sporters/clones, all thumbhole stock sporter versions of AW's (e.g. AK's, Daewoo, SIG 550, FN clones, AUG USRs), Barrett's, M1A's, Mini-14's, Mini-30's, DSA Stg 58 (US FN-FAL), Benelli M1 Super 90's and Remington 1100/11-87's with +5 capacity, and much more. All semi-auto pistols w/ detachable mag and +19 rd. capacity: eg. Glock 17/19/22/23/26/27 (w/ 30-33 rd. mags), SIG 228/226's, Browning Hi-Power's, and Beretta 92 (w/ 20 rd. mags) All semi-auto pistols w/ mag external of the pistol grip: eg. Olympic grade .22 target pistols like Hammerli's used in International bullseye matches. All pistols w/ threaded barrels: any semi-auto pistol w/ aftermarket threaded barrel (eg. IPSC race guns with compensators), HK Mk23 SOCCOM, and HK USP Tacticals After the cutoff date, folks from outside CA will not be able to bring in their banned target .22's nor 1911 variant competition guns with compensators/threaded barrels (unregistered assault weapon), which will effect the future of CA sponsoring national/international shooting events (eg. International, IPSC, Steel Challenges, Action shooting, etc.) So much for the idea of Olympic .22 pistol shooting in any proposed future Olympics held in CA... Anyway, fwiw, spread the word and get your friends to write/fax/call.... Governor Wilson phone: 916-445-2841 fax: 916-445-4633 The latest amended version of AB 23 is available online at: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/bill/asm/ab_0001-0050/ab_23_bill_980226_amende d_sen.html Thanks. Steve Lew - - ------------------------------ End of utah-firearms-digest V2 #32 **********************************