From: owner-utah-firearms-digest@lists.xmission.com (utah-firearms-digest) To: utah-firearms-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: utah-firearms-digest V2 #106 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, October 16 1998 Volume 02 : Number 106 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 12 Oct 98 22:58:00 -0700 From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: UN MEETING RESULTS! (Gun Control) 2/2 [ ...Continued From Previous Message ] Another statement from the paper was, "Canada also works closely with industry, non-governmental organizations and other interested parties in this area. Oh REALLY? What industry did Canada consult? What non-governmental organizations were involved? Wendy Coukier and her coalition? Again, Mr. Morrill was unable to respond. Will this universal registry system price us out of existence? Mr. Morrill did say that his government relies very little on NGOs' feedback considering they have all figures and facts at their fingertips. He also went on to say that "the Canadian government knows what is best for Canada." My response was "POOR CANADA!" I also reminded the distinguished delegate that if his government relies on government statistics they must get very confused considering that Statistics Canada's reports on firearms and offences do not correspond with the Justice Statistics and their statistics do not jive with the RCMP statistics. Other notes from the Canadian discussion paper included the following: * States should adopt effective methods of firearms identification and tracing. * States must improve cooperation and exchange of information and data for law enforcement purposes. * States must pursue greater international cooperation through mutual assistance regimes in prosecution relating to the illicit trafficking of and manufacturing of firearms, their parts and components and ammunition. Mr. Morrill also indicated that his government is not likely to alter from its course and the ONLY way to change their mission is by turfing the Liberals at the next election. Needless to say, I will be communicating with the Canadian Foreign Affairs Department within the week. It was confirmed by other delegates that Canada is most definitely leading the firearms control brigade! The Swiss delegation submitted a paper which requested the need for global firearm registration. They also focused on three techniques for marking weapons, ie: Laser marking within the material, stamp marking of raws and marking of colours or synthetics with glass bubbles. The U.K and Northern Ireland submitted a paper which emphasized the marking of firearms for the purpose of commercial sale within the importing country or permanent private importation, so that the source of the firearms can be traced. They encourage the need for a universal registry system. They encourage the adoption of appropriate measures to prevent the reactivation of deactivated firearms, when such reactivation is a crime under state's domestic laws. They are encouraging support and cooperation of manufacturers, dealers, importers, exporters and commercial carriers of firearms to prevent and detect the foregoing illegal activities. A copy of the Canadian and UK proposal as well as Mexico, Switzerland and Africa's responses is forthcoming. GOALS: To work closely with the NRA, and the Sporting Shooters Association of Australia in order to be a voice for millions of firearm enthusiasts around the world. Our continual presence will help balance the tables of justice so that both sides are equally presented at these UN workshops. OBJECTIVES: * To follow up with the various delegates within the next two weeks. This will further open the doors of communication but it will also foster relationship building and in turn this will encourage future reciprocal sharing of information. * Share results of the U.N meetings with the firearm community around the world. Otherwise the doors will remain closed to the general public. Remember these United Nations meetings are formulating public policy so it is vitally important that we are aware of their proposals. This was a preparatory meeting for what is to come in future. Basically the delegation banged up their framework and now they must fill it in. Many meetings are scheduled for the next two years; all can not be attended, but some kind of visable presence must be maintained. It is the goal of this committee to have all recommendations implemented by the year 2,000. Please feel free to share this information with various web sites, news groups and your local media. Additional information regarding this meeting's discussions and recommendations and the U.N initiative for global disarmament is forthcoming. Donna Ferolie 3043-20th Side Rd Hilton Beach, Ontario Canada POR 1GO - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- UN - Alabama Committee to get us out of the UN http://themustardseed.home.mindspring.com GLOBAL GUN CONTROL http://www.chambana.com/~CCG/ccun.htm Watch the UN rag burn! http://www.aloha.com/~nonperzon/animates/unburn.htm *** UN - A Constitution for the united Nations of the World http://www.universalway.org/globalgvt.html +++ GUN CONTROL - 2ND AMENDMENT +++ *** The World Wide Web GUN DEFENSE CLOCK http://www.netstorage.com/pulpless/gunclock.html *** FIREARMS & SECOND AMENDMENT http://www.tfs.net/~grizz/page5.html *** CRIMINALS FOR THE PREVENTION OF FIREARM OWNERSHIP http://members.tripod.com/~NoGuns4U/ GunsSaveLives http://GunsSaveLives.com/ Dial 911 and DIE! http://www.jpfo.org/Dial911.htm GUN OWNERS OF AMERICA http://www.gunowners.org GUN - DISARM AMERICA STATE DEPT 7277 http://harvest-trust.org/7277.htm *** GUN - MORE GUNS LESS CRIME http://www.tsra.com/Lott.htm *** Second Amendment Journals http://www.2ndlawlib.org/journals/ *** Dedicated to the proposition that the Second Amendment applies... http://www.beast-enterprises.com/ *** PRIVATE FIREARMS STOP CRIME 2.5 MILLION TIMES EACH YEAR http://www.beast-enterprises.com/kleck.html *** HOLLOW POINT DIRECTORY -Updated July 6th, 1998 with over 1,800 LINKS *** AMERICAN FIREARMS INDUSTRY http://www.amfire.com/ http://www.hollowpoint.com/ American Patriot Friends Network (APFN) APFN EMAIL LIST SUBSCRIBE/UNSCBSCRIBE IN SUBJECT LINE TO APFN@netbox.com APFN ONELIST: http://www.onelist/subscribe.cgi/apfn http://www.esotericworldnews.com/apfncont.htm http://www.freeyellow.com/members5/apfn/ - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 Oct 98 22:58:00 -0700 From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: UN MEETING RESULTS! (Gun Control) 1/2 - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Subject: UN MEETING RESULTS! (Gun Control) Date: Sun, 06 Sep 1998 21:24:21 -0400 From: globallaw@tidalwave.net Hi gang! I just returned from Argentina late last night and my report 1 # is ready to go! Report 2 # will be ready for circulation in a few days. Please feel free to contact me for further clarification on this report. Donna Ferolie ================================================================ September 6, 1998 Report on the meeting of the open-ended intergovernmental ad hoc committee on the elaboration of the comprehensive international convention against organized crime (Buenos Aires, Argentina) HISTORICAL OVERVIEW Why should gun owners concern themselves with the United Nations? After all, what jurisdiction do the U.N bureaucrats have for sticking their noses into the Canadian, U.S.A, Brazil etc....debate? To answer this question one has to ask oneself another question: why are Canada and the U.S Congress passing one bill after another to disarm, one step at a time, the civilian populations of their countries? The United Nations has made it abundantly clear that it is serious about disarming American civilians (as well as other countries around the world). Involvement by the United Nations is actually quite convenient as long as voters do not object. Here is an example of a statement released by the UN on December 22, 1995. The UN announced the launch of a study of small arms. According to the UN, small arms "are increasingly associated with crime, accidents and suicides, and form a major source of illicit profits for transnational criminal networks.... while trade in major weapons is on the decline, small arms is spreading". The worldwide survey of firearm ownership is being financed by the Japanese government. The Canadian government is supplying a number of gun-control bureaucrats to assist in the UN project. In other words the Canadian government, as well as other member states, is trying to come through the back door in order to ram further restrictive gun control legislation down the throats of the international firearm community. Our own government is hiding behind the United Nations to carry out the civilian disarmament they did not think they could get away with by themselves. With the end of the cold war, the United Nations has shifted its focus to gun control and fighting drugs as a way of continuing to justify its existence. According to my conversation with the International Centre for Criminal Law Reform and Criminal Justice Policy (which is a neutral body within the U.N), many government delegates are very aware of the fact that any new international legislation will do absolutely nothing to fight crime, because it is the governments themselves who are responsible for the spread of military firearms. Governments including the U.S order large quantities of firearms with the same serial number for training purposes. When civil unrest arises in other countries these firearms are sold. The natural sequence of events leads to the trickling down of such firearms to the civilian populations. Governments are aware of this fact, but the hidden agenda is to control the civilian populations by targeting all small firearms. ATTENDANCE AT THE UNITED NATIONS MEETING IN BUENOS AIRES Fifty representative states with 155 delegates were present at the UN international convention concerning organized crime. This was a larger turnout than expected. Sadly enough there were only three pro-firearm organizations in attendance; they were the NRA, Sporting Shooters Association of Australia and myself (from Canada). ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF THE BUENOS AIRES MEETING The United States of America delegation proposed a recommendation for future confidentiality thus not permitting NGOs to participate. The chairman of the meeting allowed Tom Mason from the NRA to respond to this. Mr. Mason strongly encouraged the entire delegation to allow future NGO involvement considering that the United Nations is moving in the direction of greater transparency. This motion was supported by the chairman of the committee. This was a major feat considering the recommendation, if carried, would have blocked any future involvement. The Canadian delegation was shocked at my presence and as the days wore on they tried to distance themselves. On the third day I was asked where my NRA friend was seated, and there seemed to be an issue around me taking another delegate's seat. I had the opportunity to inform the majority of delegates that the Canadian Foreign Affairs Department would not approve my attendance at these meetings. Moreover, I had the opportunity to lobby many delegates while at this convention. I gathered information on their regional gun control legislation as well as what they were proposing internationally. Some of these conversations transpired during working hours and some were after hours. For instance, lunch with a Japanese delegate and supper with three delegates from Lebanon. I hope the Japanese delegation appreciated my photos which were taken at this year's Grand American Trap Shoot in Ohio; they had no idea of the extent of such clay target shooting! Other lobbying efforts were made to such member states as Brazil, South Africa, Netherlands, Finland, Argentina, Australia and Poland. According to the NRA our presence alone plays a vital role which can not be underestimated. In my opinion it was as though our physical presence served as a constant reminder of millions of sports shooters from around the world. In the last year I have been communicating with many countries from around the world that feel no different than we do. They are frightened by what they see coming down the pipe at the U.N. level. Attending this meeting allowed me the opportunity to speak on their behalf to their state delegates. The Sporting Shooters Association of Australia (S.S.A.A) made a submission to the committee to work with them throughout the process. To draw upon their expertise and warned that the high costs associated with registration would only serve to drive people out of the system and into the black market. The S.S.A.A would draw upon the expertise of gun collectors in order to establish a better tracing system. Keith Tidwell, National Executive Director, feels that it is better that we offer something to the committee in order to ensure future cooperation at these meetings. CANADIAN DISCUSSION PAPER The two Canadian delegates present at this meeting were; Keith M. Morrill, Department of Foreign Affairs, and Jamie Deacon, Director Anti-Organized Crime, Department of Solicitor General of Canada. It was quite interesting that the Canadian Foreign Affairs Department was ready to submit their discussion paper concerning firearms at this meeting. It further reveals the Liberal government's unwavering determination. A copy of the Canadian Discussion Paper CICP/CON/WP will be submitted in its entirety within the next few days. After reviewing the Canadian discussion paper concerning firearms, I had the opportunity to query Mr. Morrill. I asked him if he was responsible for writing the paper which he vehemently denied. Nevertheless I continued to lambaste him with question upon question. For example, I asked him to respond to the statement, "Agreement will be needed on which firearms are to be the target of the protocol ie: those proven to be of criminal interest." What the heck does this mean? What firearms are of interest to criminals? Does this encompass any repeating firearm? There was no explanation provided - simply a shoulder shrug. [ Continued In Next Message... ] - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:30:06 -0600 From: chardy@ES.COM (Charles Hardy) Subject: [Vin_Suprynowicz@lvrj.com: Oct. 13 column - govenrment shutdown] - ----BEGIN FORWARDED MESSGE---- FROM MOUNTAIN MEDIA FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE DATED OCT. 13, 1998 THE LIBERTARIAN, By Vin Suprynowicz Call the White House bluff, and raise it one Late Monday, Oct. 12, congressional leaders announced they were near a budget deal with the White House, as lawmakers voted to keep the government open two more days while negotiations continued. Twelve days into fiscal 1999, appropriations bills controlling about $500 billion -- nearly one-third of the federal budget -- were still in play, with President Clinton demanding about $3 billion in additional pork, including $1.1 billion to give the federal government more control over hiring local elementary school teachers; money to further regulate private businesses in the name of "dealing with climate change"; and of course more taxpayer bailouts for the incompetent Communist robber-barons of Russia. Republicans had been offering nearly $2.5 billion, though the GOP wanted the $1.1 billion for new teachers returned to the states, allowing slightly local control of efforts toward "class size reduction." That was it, really -- a quibble over attempts to reduce President Clinton's Fiscal Year 1999 budget request by less than 1 percent (not to reduce the actual (start ital)budget(end ital), of course -- that continues to go up and up, forever.) And this in a day when the solidly Republican Congress is dealing with easily the most publicly debased and morally compromised Democratic president in living memory. President Clinton hardly dares show his face in public to defend the Democrats' increasingly absurd spending schemes. Yet so far have we sunk from the expectations of the so-called 1994 "Republican Revolution" that the current GOP "compromise" on the International Monetary Fund bailout of failed foreign dictators is: They can have the full $18 billion, providing the IMF "makes its proceedings more open." Oh, goody. About the last issue left unresolved Monday night was Mr. Clinton's request for more handouts for the absurdly oversized troll army of communist North Korea. What will the "compromise" be there, I wonder -- give them all the money if they'll agree to stop using Freon in their half-tracks? The White House's mechanism to again have its way with the supposedly "conservative" Republican Congress was a familiar one: Unless he got more loot, President Clinton simply threatened to veto the "inadequate" spending bills and once again "shut down the federal government" as he did in 1995, closing off access to the Washington Monument and the national parks, and blaming it all on the skinflint Republicans. No opposition party will ever be able to recapture the fiscal reins and give the American public the smaller, less intrusive government for which it has been voting (in increasing frustration) for a quarter of a century, until some congressional leader shows the creativity and the courage to call this bluff. This could be easily done, since these federal government "shutdowns" are really no more than transparent public relations schemes to inconvenience as many tourists as possible. If your local cable television provider shut down for two weeks to make repairs, you would expect to receive a monthly bill discounting the amount of time when you received no services, right? Well then: The next time a Democratic president speaks of "shutting down the federal government," the GOP congressional leadership should give the time-honored response of Br'er Rabbit. The Congress must order the IRS to instruct America's employers to withhold no taxes from any worker's paycheck for the time during which the federal government is declared "shut down" by the White House. The Congress must declare as a matter of law that -- for as long as the Democratic White House wishes to keep the federal government "shut down" -- Americans will remain on a tax-free holiday. Other than some allowance for active duty military personnel overseas, no federal paychecks shall issue, nor shall any federal taxes which would otherwise have fallen due during that period (start ital)ever(end ital) be assessed or collected, even retroactively. Stocks or real estate sold during the shutdown? Free of any capital gains tax. Machine guns sold, imported or manufactured? Another tax and paperwork amnesty. Freon and other imports? Race them across the borders, boys, it's a tariff holiday, too. The Congress need only enact such an override to existing tax laws, and then turn to the White House and say, "Oh please, Mr. President, whatever you do, (start ital)please(end ital) don't shut down the gubbimint." Would Americans tolerate "no federal government" if it meant an immediate and total hiatus in federal taxes and regulations, as well? Heavens, what if if turned out they (start ital)liked(end ital) it that way? Somehow, I suspect this is an experiment in which the Democrats would prove far less willing to join. 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 The evils of tyranny are rarely seen but by him who resists it. -- John Hay, 1872 The most difficult struggle of all is the one within ourselves. Let us not get accustomed and adjusted to these conditions. The one who adjusts ceases to discriminate between good and evil. He becomes a slave in body and soul. Whatever may happen to you, remember always: Don't adjust! Revolt against the reality! -- Mordechai Anielewicz, Warsaw, 1943 * * * - ----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. "Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom? Congress shall have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American .. The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the People." -- Tench Coxe - 1788. - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 13:41:46 -0600 From: chardy@ES.COM (Charles Hardy) Subject: [goamail@gunowners.org: Hammer RNC on the Smith Amendment] - ----BEGIN FORWARDED MESSGE---- Vote On Smith Anti-Brady Amendment Could be Tomorrow -- Time to Push the RNC Button Gun Owners of America E-Mail/FAX Alert 8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408 http://www.gunowners.org (Tuesday, October 13, 1998) -- Well, it turns out that the full (Sen. Bob) Smith language is NOT included in the Commerce-Justice-State conference report which will probably be sent back to the House and Senate for final consideration tomorrow. On Friday, Gun Owners of America sent a communication to legislators on the Hill asking them to vote against the Commerce-Justice-State bill, as a protest against the corrupting of the Smith Anti-Tax and Registration amendment. The conference version has dropped an extremely important part of the Smith amendment which would allow aggrieved private citizens to sue the FBI, and to collect monetary damages, including attorney's fees. As we noted last week, deleting this language from the bill means that gun owners may have to rely upon Janet Reno to rein in FBI officials who illegally retain gun owners' names-- an outrageous scenario. GOA is also dismayed that the provision requiring the "immediate destruction" of all gun owners' names has been deleted. Allowing the FBI to keep gun owners' names for 24 hours represents the first time in federal history that government officials would have explicit permission to retain gun owners' names for a period of time-- albeit a brief period. GOA on the Hill Gun Owners of America has been working through the leadership offices of both houses to get the full Smith amendment restored. We have also drafted letters for House Representatives to send to their leaders, such as Speaker Gingrich, demanding that the full amendment be added to the bill. Senator Smith himself has also been lobbying to get his amendment restored. GOA would ask that you keep trying to leave your opinions with the leadership offices if you haven't already. Many of you have not been able to get through by fax. But realize that when this happens, it is a GOOD sign. If their fax machines are not answering, it usually means that their paper trays have been emptied by gun owners. HERE'S WHAT TO DO * If you've already contacted the leadership offices, turn your "guns" (so to speak) on the Republican National Committee (RNC). The Republican leadership is prepared to cave in to Bill Clinton's threatened veto of the Appropriations bill if it contains the Smith Anti-Brady amendment. * It doesn't matter whether you're a Republican, Democrat or Independent. Tell the RNC that if the Smith amendment is weakened in any way, they can kiss your financial support good-bye! * Also, ask them why the Republican leadership would water down a pro-gun amendment like the Smith amendment, when they did nothing to weaken anti-gun legislation like the Lautenberg and Kohl gun bans. * These two gun bans-- which were added to appropriations legislation during the last Congress-- were not removed or significantly watered down one bit during the conference committee process. But now, the Smith amendment (which is the best piece of legislation that gun owners have seen in a LONG time) has been trashed by the conference committee, even though it passed overwhelmingly in the Senate with a veto-proof majority! What's wrong with this picture? HOW TO CONTACT THE RNC * Contact Jim Nicholson, Chairman of the RNC, in the following ways: Phone: 202-863-8500 or 202-863-8700 Fax: 202-863-8774 or 202-863-8820 Email: chairman@rnc.org Pre-written text is provided below. * The RNC is telling people that they are in support of the Smith Amendment. This is not enough. We want more than their support. We want the FULL Smith amendment; and not just support for a desecrated version of it! **** Pre-written text **** Dear Chairman Nicholson: I cannot believe that the Republican leadership is watering down the Smith Anti-Tax and Registration amendment! As you may know, the FBI has issued regulations stating their intent to register and tax gun owners. Senator Bob Smith offered an amendment to put a stop to this-- and the amendment passed overwhelmingly with 69 votes back in July. However, the appropriations conference committee has dropped an extremely important part of the Smith amendment which would allow aggrieved private citizens to sue the FBI, and to collect monetary damages, including attorney's fees. Deleting this language from the bill means that gun owners may have to rely upon Janet Reno to rein in FBI officials who illegally retain gun owners' names-- an outrageous scenario. And, the provision requiring the "immediate destruction" of all gun owners' names has been deleted. Allowing the FBI to keep gun owners' names for 24 hours represents the first time in federal history that government officials would have explicit permission to retain gun owners' names for a period of time-- albeit a brief period. Why would the Republican leadership water down a pro-gun amendment like the Smith amendment, when they did nothing to weaken anti-gun legislation like the Lautenberg and Kohl gun bans? These two gun bans-- which were added to appropriations legislation during the last Congress-- were not removed or significantly watered down one bit during the conference committee process. But now, the Smith amendment (which is the best piece of legislation that gun owners have seen in a LONG time) has been desecrated by the appropriations conference committee, even though it passed overwhelmingly in the Senate with a veto-proof majority! What's wrong with this picture? I hope you will pass on my views to House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott. I want the FULL Smith amendment passed as part of the omnibus spending bill. But if the Republicans are going to sell out my gun rights and continue to water-down the most significant pro-gun vote in the Senate for more than a decade, don't bother to ask me or any other gun owner for a contribution this year because we will send it to people who truly care about our rights as gun owners. You've taken gun owners for granted one time too often. Sincerely, **************************************************************** Did someone else forward this to you? To be certain of getting up to date information, please consider subscribing directly to the GOA E-Mail Alert Network. The service is totally free and carries no obligation. Your e-mail address remains confidential, and the volume is quite low, usually one or two messages per week. To subscribe, simply send a message (or forward this notice) to goamail@gunowners.org and indicate your state of residence in either the subject or the body. To unsubscribe, reply to any alert and ask to be removed. - ----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 object of war is not to die for your country, but to make the other bastard die for his." -- General George S. Patton - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Oct 98 19:40:00 -0700 From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: Bureau Arson Terrorism Fascism: Taft Suicide???? - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 16:19:18 -0400 From: Patricia Neill To: jdinardo@idt.NET Subject: Re: Bureau Arson Terrorism Fascism: Taft Suicide???? Friends, Below note from a friend, resident of Taft, CA, of Daryl Howell. Regards, Brian Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 21:00:24 -0700 From: Elaine White To: archangel@telisphere.com Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 06:11:13 +0000 To: EWEguam@ycsi.net From: Bill Brumbaugh To: mrbill888@ycsi.net Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 08:21:29 PDT Hi Bill, I have gotten some new information on the shooting in Taft. As I have said, Darryl Howell was a friend of mine and a brother in Christ. I have known Darryl for for about 5 years. This was not something Darryl would have done. He did not deal in illegal weapons. I actually lived at his house and shop for 4 months in 1997, he was kind enough to give me a place to stay when I left my ex-husband. We were very close friends. He would not have done this. I have read the 'official account' of what had happened, and there are so many holes in it that it makes no sense. First of all, when they served the search warrant, he knew his store was clean, he would have smiled at them and told them to search on boys. As far as I know, from a family member who was given the search warrant after the incident, there were no arrest warrants issued. Why were they arresting him. His shop was clean. They found no illegal weapons on the premises. And when they claim, that he shot himself, placing a 45 in his mouth, he would have been dead instantly, dropping to the floor. If the cop that shot him was looking away at the time, when would he have time to shoot Darryl 3 more times? By the time Ed Whiting shot, Darryl would have been on the ground. Also, a shot to the brain would leave a big mess. Blood, brain tissue, and bone fragments everywhere. I spoke with his son, who is staying at his shop. He told me, there was no blood spray, or any brain tissue anywhere. The only blood there was, was a 9" pool of blood on the floor where Darryl had fallen. When you have a shot to the head, you have a huge pool of blood. The 9" pool would be conducive of the wounds in his side. And there was bad blood between Darryl and Ed Whiting which goes back years. Ed Whiting is a dirty cop. He runs drugs in town, everyone in town knows it. At the press conference, Sheriff Carl Sparks said that Ed Whiting requested to go along because he was a friend of Darryls, hogwash. Ed Whiting went there for one reason only, the hope of taking Darryl down. And we add to this, the sheriff's deputy that said that day (we have his badge #) that if he could he would take off his badge and uniform cause this was wrong. Darryl was clean. He was a christian and a patriot, and I personally believe he was executed. There is going to be an independent investigation done on this, because the facts do not add up to what went down. I will keep you updated, as the facts come out. In Christ Jesus, Sue Patterson - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Oct 98 21:42:00 -0700 From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: Vermont carry questions Anyone know the history of Vermont carry? Specifically dates, specific changes, effects on Vermont's crime rates, and what political factions enacted it? Chris Kozlowski asks: > > > And to think the NRA opposes Vermont carry! What a sellout crew! > > Please explain. What is the "Vermont carry?" I can guess, but I > > would like to know more. > Vermont carry is their law governing concealed gun carry that > makes it unlawful to carry a gun for unlawful purposes. > That is all. No permits, licenses, etc. Who passed this law, and when, and how was the firearm crime rate affected? - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 09:52:42 -0700 From: Joe Waldron Subject: Re: Vermont carry questions SCOTT BERGESON wrote: > > Anyone know the history of Vermont carry? Specifically > dates, specific changes, effects on Vermont's crime rates, > and what political factions enacted it? No political faction passed it. In 1903, the Vermont Supreme Court overturned a Rutland city ordinance prohibiting the carry of concealed weapons (State V Rosental). The Vermont legislature has seen fit to let that stand. NO STATE LEGISLATURE, including Vermont's, has passed "Vermont-style carry." Joe W - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 16:39:45 -0600 From: chardy@ES.COM (Charles Hardy) Subject: [goamail@gunowners.org: Switch Targets Re: Smith Amendment] - ----BEGIN FORWARDED MESSGE---- Still Time to Save the FULL Smith Amendment -- Tell Gingrich and Lott what you told the RNC Gun Owners of America E-Mail/FAX Alert 8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408 http://www.gunowners.org (Wednesday, October 14, 1998) -- Well, the Congress has put off the battle over government funding (and the battle over the final language in the Smith Anti-Brady amendment) for two more days. This gives us more time to make sure that the power centers in Washington know how folks in the heartland feel about their Second Amendment rights. We have 48 more hours to let the politicians feel the heat. Yesterday, GOA asked you to send a very important message to RNC Chairman Jim Nicholson. As a result, they have been flooded with phone calls, faxes and emails. Great work! Unfortunately, the NRC has been responding in-- shall we say-- "Clinton-speak." They have assured some people that the Smith amendment has the "full support of the RNC." Others have been told that the RNC "knows nothing" about the Smith amendment. But at the very least, we know that Jim Nicholson is getting the message. Now we need to make sure that this message is relayed to Capitol Hill. Yesterday, the RNC was receiving a solid 50 calls per hour in support of the Smith amendment-- and who knows how many faxes and emails. Let's do the same for the Republican leadership in the House and Senate. HERE'S WHAT YOU CAN DO: * Contact House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott. Give them the same message that you gave to the RNC yesterday. Tell Gingrich and Lott that if the Smith amendment is weakened or watered-down in any way, the RNC can kiss your financial support good-bye. (See the phone numbers below.) In fact, you might want to fax them the same message you sent to Mr. Nicholson. * We have also included the numbers for the National Republican Senatorial Committee and the National Republican Congressional Committee. The former is tasked with electing Republican Senators; the latter, with electing Republican Congressmen. Sending them the message you already sent Nicholson could also multiply your efforts. Important Capitol Hill Numbers for Registering Your Opinion Phone: Fax: Sen. Trent Lott (ofc.) 202-224-6253 / 224-2262 Lott's leadership ofc. 202-224-3135 / 224-4639 senatorlott@lott.senate.gov Rep. Newt Gingrich (ofc.) 202-225-4501 / 225-4656 Gingrich's leadership ofc. 202-225-0600 / 225-7733 georgia6@mail.house.gov National Republican Senatorial Committee 202-675-6000 / 675-6058 National Republican Congressional Committee 202-479-7000 / 863-0693 Many of you have asked for the conference committee members, and thus, we are listing most of them here. You can reach them at 202- 224-3121. The conferees working on the Commerce-Justice-State bill include: Rep. Rogers (KY) Fax: 202-225-0940 Rep. Kolbe (AZ) Fax: 202-225-0378 Rep. Taylor (NC) RepCharles.Taylor@mail.house.gov Rep. Regula (OH) Fax: 202-225-3059 Rep. Latham (IA) latham.ia05@mail.house.gov Fax: 202-225-3301 Rep. Livingston (LA) Fax: 202-225-0739 Rep. Mollohan (WV) Fax: 202-225-7564 Sen. Campbell (CO) Fax: 202-224-1933 Sen. Domenici (NM) senator_domenici@domenici.senate.gov Fax: 202-224-7371 Sen. Gregg (NH) mailbox@gregg.senate.gov Fax: 202-224-4952 Sen. Hollings (SC) Fax: 202-224-4293 Sen. Hutchison (TX) senator@hutchison.senate.gov Fax: 202-224-0776 Sen. McConnell (KY) senator@mcconnell.senate.gov Fax: 202-224-2499 Sen. Stevens (AK) senator_stevens@stevens.senate.gov Fax: 202-224-2354 **************************************************************** Did someone else forward this to you? To be certain of getting up to date information, please consider subscribing directly to the GOA E-Mail Alert Network. The service is totally free and carries no obligation. Your e-mail address remains confidential, and the volume is quite low, usually one or two messages per week. To subscribe, simply send a message (or forward this notice) to goamail@gunowners.org and indicate your state of residence in either the subject or the body. To unsubscribe, reply to any alert and ask to be removed. - ----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. "To avoid domestic tyranny, the people must be armed to stand upon [their] own Defence; which if [they] are enabled to do, [they] shall never be put upon it, but [their] Swords may grow rusty in [their] hands; for that Nation is surest to live in Peace, that is most capable of making War; and a Man that hath a Sword by his side, shall have least occasion to make use of it." -- John Trenchard & Walter Moyle, "An Argument Shewing, That a Standing Army is Inconsistent With a Free Government, and Absolutely Destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy" [London, 1697] ("An Argument") - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 15:15:03 -0600 From: chardy@ES.COM (Charles Hardy) Subject: [Quote of the day....] - ----BEGIN FORWARDED MESSGE---- Nominated for quote of the year is the statement made by Representative Dick Armey, who, when asked if he were in the president's place, would he resign, responded: "If I were in the President's place I would not get a chance to resign. I would be lying in a pool of my own blood hearing Mrs. Armey standing over me saying, "How do I reload this damn thing?" - ----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. "Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys." - P.J. O'Rourke - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Oct 98 20:50:00 -0700 From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: Taft shooting - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Walter Lee To: Jonathan Nelson , gsl@listbox.com Subject: GSL> Re: Taft shooting Mr. Nelson, Thank you for your response. In no way was I implying that you had a bias. My repeated phrase--"You assert" was simply a declaration that the story "asserted" certain facts. The fact that they came from federal court documents was unclear, or if it was clear, I missed it. I am still not certain what "charges filed against Mr. Howell..." means. Had he been indicted by a grand jury? Had a warrant been issued for his arrest? I understand an affidavit for a search warrant. That includes sworn testimony, but I know of no cases where a police official has been prosecuted for filing a false affidavit, including the Waco Case mentioned in my letter. The reason that I wrote to you and Ms. Peterson is that you are in a position to find the facts of this story. I cannot. I am sure that the internet will be alive with rumors, innuendo, accusations, etc. Without some person or without people on the ground who provide unbiased information, the hype regarding a case like this can grow out of control. You say it is up to readers like me to draw conclusions. However, drawing conclusions without an adequate basis of facts is simply to rely on existing prejudice and bias. Those who despise the BATF will blame them. Those who hate guns and gun dealers will say, "Another one of them got what was coming to him." The problem we have in our society is that conclusions are too readily drawn based on inadequate or false information. One of the problems with the press is that due to deadlines and hundreds of demands (not to mention political pressure) the easiest way to do the job is to quote official sources who essentially hand you a story prepackaged. In a case such as this, when the authorities make up one side of the dispute, there is internal pressure on the system to spin press releases in the best possible manner. If the dispute involves to private parties, then perhaps police departments, courts, and agencies are inclined to be balanced. In a large police department with an established internal affairs division, perhaps an unbiased accounting could be officially rendered. (In Texas, this case would be turned over to the Rangers for investigation.) However, it would seem to me that in the situation described in your report, there are no official parties or agencies that have an interest in doing anything but making this thing go away. The BATF has a bad reputation and they are experts at spin control. The Taft Police Department is small, and I assume close knit, and the tendency is for LE to take care of their own. The Kern Co. SO has to work with the Taft department and it will affect relations for a long time if they take a hard stance in this investigation. Prosecutors hate to muddy their relationships with local police. In the end, if you (or someone like you) doesn't dig out this story, wherever it leads, it will be covered up. Has the search warrant affidavit been released? What were the specific charges against Mr. Howell? What kind of machine guns is he accused of selling? Were they actual guns or were they parts, when coupled with other guns, that could be made into fully automatic weapons? Under federal law, some small parts are defined as "machine guns" if other pieces are also in one's possession. The charge of selling machine guns is a technical offense. It can conjure up images of opening a violin case and handing someone a Thompson for a handful of cash, or it can be far more mundane. If Mr. Howell were truly aware of firearms law (as one of your paper's stories suggest) then he may not have committed an offense. And of course, just because someone is accused, it does not mean that they are guilty. If Mr. Howell were alive, he might be able to legally defend himself. But of course he is not. I suspect that you are aware that as a federally licensed dealer, Mr. Howell was subject to routine inspections. The BATF has a legal right to enter his store during business hours and examine his books and inventory. Why the raid format? (BTW, have you discovered how the officers were dressed for the raid? Was this a black-suited Ninja situation or one in which the officers were dressed in street clothes or maybe even "gang attire?" Were the SO and Taft officers in uniform?) Another question from your paper's report--one where you are reporting official sources, I am sure. Actually, this is from Fred Ludwid (10/08/98): "Darryl Howell broke loose from authorities trying to handcuff him Wednesday morning and grabbed a handgun behind the counter, officials said. After a struggle with a U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms agent, Howell put the gun in his mouth and fired, officials said. Taft police Sgt. Ed Whiting, who had turned away and didn't realize what had happened, then fired three shots into Howell's body, they said." Later in the same article: "A pat-down search indicated Howell was unarmed, but Howell grabbed the .45-caliber handgun. Whiting, who did not see all of the ensuing struggle, fired after hearing Howell's suicidal shot, said sheriff's Sgt. Glenn Johnson. Howell offered no reason for the suicide, Johnson said." I can understand the second version. You come into the store. You pat down Mr. Howell. One or more officers are interviewing him. Other officers begin to look for evidence. Mr. Howell does something unpredictable, grabs a gun and shoots himself. But this does not square with the first report and its words trouble me. If there is a scuffle going on while the BATF is trying to handcuff him, what is Sgt. Whitting doing with his back turned and not paying attention? By reports, there are no other people in the store. I have been in situations where an arrest was being made and a fight breaks out. Everytime, the hairs on my neck are standing up and my eyes riveted on the suspect. There are just too many inconsistencies in the story. Your paper is the only news media to report anything that I have seen. Therefore, it is to your paper that I turn. I hope you will discover and report the answers. BTW, reviewing the obituaries in your paper, there is no mention of Mr. Howell. Does your paper not report deaths in Taft, or is the body still being held by authorities? Walter Lee Jonathan Nelson wrote: > Mr. Lee, > Thank you for your interest in the Taft shooting story and your e-mail. > I'd like to clarify just one point. In your letter you stated several > times assertions I made. I made no assertions. The information I based > my story on was came from federal court documents, which included the > affidavit for search warrant and charges filed against Mr. Howell, Reed > and Spielman. > Our earlier stories attempted to give people an idea of what happened at > the gun shop and what kind of a person Mr. Howell is, according to > friends. My story was again trying to give people a complete picture of > what transpired before, during and after the shooting. > I take no side on the issue, other than trying to give people a complete > and accurate story from the information I have available to me. It's up > to readers like you to draw your own conclusions and form your opinions > from those stories and any other avenue of information. > I and the other news orginzations will continue to follow the story and > follow every lead possible. - - ------------------------------ End of utah-firearms-digest V2 #106 ***********************************