From: owner-utah-firearms-digest@lists.xmission.com (utah-firearms-digest) To: utah-firearms-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: utah-firearms-digest V2 #135 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 Monday, May 17 1999 Volume 02 : Number 135 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 12:50:04 -0600 From: charles hardy Subject: Another DesNews poll of interest to gun owners There is another Deseret News Poll that may be of interest to some. It is located middle of the page, right hand side at and asks: Concerned about school safety, Utah school districts and boards are taking steps to prevent violent outbreaks. What procedure do you think would be most effective? Current Responses are: In-school police 2 votes (25%) Special training 1 vote (13%) Security cameras (no votes yet) Social workers 1 vote (13%) Ban of weapons 2 votes (25%) After-school groups 2 votes (25%) May I humbly suggest that a "ban of weapons" will likely be interpreted as a call to ban CCW permited firearms in schools and we should vote for something other than that so it isn't a top vote getter. "Special Training" is very vague, but I consider allowing teachers to CCW to fall into that catagory so that is where my vote went. ================================================================== Charles C. Hardy ___________________________________________________________________ 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/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 19:58:38 -0600 From: "S. Thompson" Subject: URGENT -- Need Guns Save Lives Storries Please forward to as many as possible! Thanks! The anti-gun Atlanta Journal-Constitution is soliciting letters and e-mail relating to TRUE stories about the personal ownership and use of fitrearms. The letters need to be signed, 600 words or less, and true stories - not opinion or debate. They want to know if you used a gun to protect yourself or someone else from a carjacker, mugger or rapist or if the weapon you use for protection was involved in a cccident or suicde. Submissions to oped@ajc.com , fax to 404-526-5611 , or mail to: 72 Marietta St., NW Atlanta, GA 30303. This is a great chance for all those who have used firearms for protection to make their voice heard. You read these stories every month in American Rifleman - but that's like preaching to the choir. Let's make believers out of the rest! Thanks. Don Cely When women are disarmed, a rapist will never hear - Stop or I'll shoot! - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 10:44:18 -0600 From: charles hardy Subject: Fw: ALERT! Time Magazine Gun Poll! ================================================================== Charles C. Hardy - --------- Forwarded message ---------- To All: Make your mark on the Time Magazine Gun Poll!!! You can find the poll at the following address: http://www.pathfinder.com/time/polls/gunpoll.html ================================================================== Charles C. Hardy ___________________________________________________________________ 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/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 12:18:29 -0600 From: "S. Thompson" Subject: Fw: Time Magazine Gun Poll >>Have you re-taken the Time Magazine gun poll yet? >> >>In the first Time gun ownership poll, the count of participants was over >>200,000. >> >>The poll was OVERWHELMINGLY pro gun, and in our favor. Well, the spin >>artists don't like that, so Time Magazine reset the counters, and restated >>he poll - same questions. The counter is now at about 80,750. >> >>You must take the poll again and e-mail every one you know and urge them to >>do the same. Time Magazine is about to find out what is real in America. >>Make it happen. Do it now. >> >>Please take the poll NOW!! >>There is no block on this for multiple votes -- so go for it! >> >>VOTE HERE >>http://www.pathfinder.com/time/polls/gunpoll.html >> > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 13:58:42 -0600 From: charles hardy Subject: Des News gun poll needs your vote Current standings on this week's Desnews online poll follow. Thankfully, "banning weapons in schools" is not the top vote getter. But it has moved past "security cameras" into the top 50% of responses. I personnaly think it would be beneficial if banning weapons was was no higher than 4th or 5th place on the list and ideally it should end up being the dead last option of what people think will curb school violence. So, I urge you to take a moment and register your opinion at . I think it would be beneficial to encourage people to vote for "security cameras" at this point until it leads banning weapons, and then to encourage votes for other catagories to keep banning weapons near the botton of the prefferred responses. In-school police 142 votes (28%) Special training 104 votes (21%) Security cameras 79 votes (16%) Social workers 50 votes (10%) Ban of weapons 83 votes (16%) After-school groups 47 votes (9%) ================================================================== Charles C. Hardy ___________________________________________________________________ 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/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 May 99 14:01:00 -0700 From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: Re: FW: GUN ALERT: URGENT!!! URGENT!!! URGENT!!! - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 21:59:44 -0600 From: "Jim Dexter" Subject: LPU: FW: GUN ALERT: URGENT!!! URGENT!!! URGENT!!! According to AP, our dear Sen. Hatch is collaborating with none other than CHARLES SCHUMER on the Juvenile Justice Bill! The following was provided by GOA: Ask Your Senators to Support the Smith Amendment - -- Provision would preserve the Second Amendment from extinction Gun Owners of America E-Mail/FAX Alert 8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408 http://www.gunowners.org Wednesday, May 12, 1999 ACTION: Your immediate action is needed. For at least two days, the U.S. Senate will be debating a juvenile crime bill introduced by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT). But anti-gun Senators are trying to load up that bill with several gun control amendments. Please take the following actions right away: 1. Ask your Senator to support the Smith amendment that will stop the anti-gun lawsuits that are currently seeking to shut down the gun industry (202-224-3121; see the GOA website for fax and e-mail contact info). The Smith amendment is virtually identical to S. 954, which was introduced last week. Please read below for a description of the Smith amendment. 2. Please forward this alert to as many people as you can and urge them to contact their Senators as well. Smith Amendment Aimed at Preserving Gun Industry; Putting anti-gunners on the Defensive As you know, several mayors and anti-gun lawyers have launched frivolous lawsuits against many in the gun industry. In short, these lawsuits could accomplish what the anti-gun lobby has not been able to do in fifty years-- wipe out his country's firearms industry, and in so doing, prevent citizens from being able to buy firearms. Senator Bob Smith (R-NH) plans to put a stop to that with S. 954. And his office has told GOA that he plans to stick this bill as an amendment to a series of bills (including the crime bill), and thus, put the anti-gunners on the defensive. This bill/amendment would do two things: (1) It would limit the amount greedy lawyers could reap from anti-gun judgments to $150 an hour. This would eliminate the massive contingent fees-- in at least one case, reaching hundreds of millions of dollars-- which were awarded in the tobacco suits, and will virtually guarantee that these lawyers will lose interest in pursuing the litigation. (2) It would require HCI and the anti-gun municipalities to finance the legal expenses of the gun industry if these frivolous suits are ultimately unsuccessful. Anti-gun Senators Looking to Load-up Crime Bill with anti-gun Amendments According to today's Washington Post, "While GOP and Democratic leaders are pushing more modest [gun control] measures, a half-dozen Democratic senators have served notice that they will push for stronger gun proposals." Some the proposals which Senators are likely to vote on over the next couple of days are: * A new three day waiting period; * Mandatory instant "registration" check for private sales at gun shows (Republicans have put forth a compromise of "voluntary" registration checks); * Imprisoning adults for crimes committed with guns that were stolen from them by children; * A lifetime gun ban for youthful indiscretions; * A young adult gun ban; * Regulation of internet gun sales; and much more. The Smith amendment would put anti-gunners on the defensive, and could have the subsidiary effect of forcing a Presidential veto of the entire crime bill-- even if it contains anti-gun amendments. ************** Did someone else forward this to you? To be certain of getting up to date information, please consider subscribing to the GOA E-Mail Alert Network directly. There is no cost or obligation, and the volume of mail is quite low. To subscribe, simply send a message to goamail@gunowners.org and include the state in which you live, in either the subject or the body. To unsubscribe, reply to any alert and ask to be removed. - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 May 99 14:48:00 -0700 From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: Re: Gun Laws Can Be Dangerous, Too Wall Street Journal.... May 12, 1999 Commentary Gun Laws Can Be Dangerous, Too By John R. Lott Jr., a fellow in law and economics at the University of Chicago School of Law. He is author of "More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws" (University of Chicago Press, 1998). Keeping their promise to President Clinton, Republican leaders in Congress have moved quickly to consider a broad range of gun-control laws in the wake of the Littleton attack. Today the Senate will be debating and voting on a range of new proposals, with the House Judiciary Committee set to start hearings tomorrow. Mr. Clinton says that we must "do something" and that he knows "one thing for certain": If more restrictions had been enacted, "there would have been fewer kids killed." Not as scary as it looks. But would more gun laws save lives? There are already a large number of laws in place. The Columbine murderers, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, violated at least 17 state and federal weapons-control laws. Mark E. Manes, who allegedly sold the handgun to Harris and Klebold, may have violated at least one federal and one state law, and if either of the killers' parents knew their child possessed a handgun, they would have run afoul of a Colorado law. Nationwide there are more than 20,000 gun-control laws that regulate everything from who can own a gun and how it can be purchased to where one can possess or use it. Regulations have both costs and benefits, and rules that are passed to solve a problem can sometimes make it worse. The biggest problem with gun-control laws is that those who are intent on harming others, and especially those who plan to commit suicide, are the least likely to obey them. Mr. Clinton frames the issue in terms of whether hunters are willing to be "inconvenienced," but this misses the real question: Will well-intended laws disarm potential victims and thus make it easier for criminals? Potential victims use guns more than two million times a year to stop violent crimes; 98% of the time simply brandishing a gun is sufficient to stop an attack. Crimes are stopped with guns about five times as frequently as crimes are committed with guns. Consider, then, the costs and benefits of Mr. Clinton's main proposals: Waiting periods. A three-day waiting period for handgun purchases could not possibly have stopped the Littleton attack, which the killers had been planning for a year. Mr. Clinton focuses on the general benefits from a "cooling-off period," and such benefits might exist. Yet real drawbacks exist, too. Those threatened with harm may not be able to quickly obtain a gun for protection. Experience with the Brady waiting period that lapsed last year, as well as with state waiting periods, indicates that these laws are either neutral or do more harm than good. In the only academic research done on the Brady law, I found that the national waiting period had no significant impact on murder or robbery rates and was associated with a small increase in rape and aggravated-assault rates. Mandatory gun locks. This proposal, too, is unrelated to the attack in Colorado; Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold would have known how to unlock their guns. Mr. Clinton claims that gun locks will save lives, particularly those of young children. In 1996 30 children under five died in gun accidents-- fewer than the number who died of drowning in water buckets. With some 80 million Americans owning 240 million guns, the vast majority of gun owners must be extremely careful or such accidents would be much more frequent. More important, thousands of children are protected each year by parents or other adults using guns to defend themselves and their families. Mechanical locks that fit either into a gun's barrel or over its trigger require the gun to be unloaded; and locked, unloaded guns offer far less protection from intruders. Thus requiring locks would surely increase deaths resulting from crime. Gun locks may make sense for parents who live in low-crime areas, but this should be a matter of individual choice. Prison sentences for adults whose guns are misused by someone under 18. Parents are already civilly liable for wrongful actions committed by their children, but Mr. Clinton proposes a three-year minimum prison term for anyone whose gun is used improperly by any minor, regardless of whether the gun owner consents to or knows of the use. This is draconian, to say the least, the equivalent of sending Mom and Dad to prison because an auto thief kills someone while driving the family car. New rules for gun shows. The Clinton administration has provided no evidence that such shows are important in supplying criminals with guns. What's more, it is simply false to claim that the rules for purchasing guns at a gun show are any different from those regarding gun purchases anywhere else. Dealers who sell guns at a show must perform the same background checks and obey all the other rules that they do when they make sales at their stores. Private sales are unregulated whether they occur at a gun show or not. If, as Mr. Clinton proposes, the government enacts new laws regulating private sales at gun shows, all someone would have to do is walk outside the show and sell the gun there. To regulate private sales, the government would have to register all guns. Those who advocate the new rules for gun shows should be willing to acknowledge openly if their real goal is registration. Age limits. Mr. Clinton proposes a federal ban on possession of handguns by anyone under 21. Under a 1968 federal law, 21 is already the minimum age to purchase a handgun, but setting the age to possess a handgun is a state matter. While some people between 18 and 21 use guns improperly, others face the risk of crime and would benefit from defending themselves. My own research indicates that laws allowing those between 18 and 21 years of age to carry a concealed handgun reduce violent crimes just as well as those limited to citizens over 21. Background checks for purchasers of bomb-making material. This will have little effect, simply because few items are likely to be covered. No one seriously discusses including fertilizer, used to make the bomb that killed 168 in Oklahoma City in 1995, or propane tanks like the ones found after the Littleton massacre. There are simply too many common household items that can be used to make bombs. Much of the debate over gun control these days is conducted without regard for facts. For example, the press reproduces pictures of a Tech-9, the so-called assault pistol used in the Columbine attack. The pictures show a much larger ammunition clip than was actually used, making it look as frightening as possible. Few reports even mention that at most one of the 13 Littleton victims was killed with this gun. In spite of all the rhetoric and despite its appearance, this "assault weapon" functions no differently from other semiautomatic pistols sold in the U.S. It is no more powerful, it doesn't shoot any faster, and it doesn't shoot any more rounds. One pull of the trigger fires one bullet. Good intentions don't necessarily make good laws. What counts is whether the laws will ultimately save lives. The real tragedy of Mr. Clinton's proposals is that they are likely to lead to the loss of more lives. - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 05:34:51 -0600 From: "larry larsen" Subject: Re: Another DesNews poll of interest to gun owners On this poll, as usual None of the Above. - -----Original Message----- From: charles hardy To: utah-firearms@xmission.com Date: Wednesday, May 12, 1999 12:52 PM Subject: Another DesNews poll of interest to gun owners >There is another Deseret News Poll that may be of interest to some. It >is located middle of the page, right hand side at > and asks: > >Concerned about school safety, Utah school districts and boards are >taking steps to prevent violent outbreaks. What > procedure do you think would be most effective? > >Current Responses are: > > In-school police > > > 2 votes (25%) > Special training > > > 1 vote (13%) > Security cameras > > > (no votes yet) > Social workers > > > 1 vote (13%) > Ban of weapons > > > 2 votes (25%) > After-school groups > > > 2 votes (25%) > >May I humbly suggest that a "ban of weapons" will likely be interpreted >as a call to ban CCW permited firearms in schools and we should vote for >something other than that so it isn't a top vote getter. "Special >Training" is very vague, but I consider allowing teachers to CCW to fall >into that catagory so that is where my vote went. > >================================================================== >Charles C. Hardy > > >___________________________________________________________________ >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/getjuno.html >or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] > >- > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 15 May 99 16:05:00 -0700 From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: Re: FW: UT: Sen. Hatch Actively Pushing Gun Control - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "Jim Elwell" Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 16:54:12 -0600 Subject: LPU: (Fwd) UT: Sen. Hatch Actively Pushing Gun Control OK, Fellow Utahns, get your email going! Below is my letter to Senator Hatch, followed by a very recent (less than an hour old) posting from GOA. ****************************** my letter ************************** 14 May 1999 Honorable Senator Hatch: It has come to my attention that, even as a leading Republican senator, you can no longer be depended on to defend the 2nd Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens of this country. I am very disappointed to hear of some of your recent anti-gun proposals, which were included in the amendment you brought to the floor today (14 May 1999). Unfortunately, your "victim disarmament" amendment passed by a narrow margin, in spite of the courageous opposition of Senator Bob Smith (R-NH) and Senator Conrad Burns (R-MT). It is a shame that the gun-grabbers of this country have so exploited the Littleton tragedy, but it is no surprise. It is even more a shame, and a terrible and surprising turn of events, that Republicans can no longer be counted on to stand up to the anti-gun hysteria whipped up by our liberal press. I am profoundly disappointed in your actions, and I encourage you to rethink your willingness to violate the sacred principles of our Constitution. Sincerely, James K. Elwell 3353 South Main #314 Salt Lake City, Utah 84106 801-483-2890 elwell@inconnect.com ************************************ GOA posting ******************** Date sent: Fri, 14 May 1999 17:13:22 -0400 From: Gun Owners of America To: goamail@gunowners.org Subject: UT: Sen. Hatch Actively Pushing Gun Control Why is Senator Orrin Hatch Pushing Gun Control? - -- Ask him to stop pushing Sarah Brady's agenda 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 Utah alert-- Friday, May 14, 1999 For the past several weeks, the anti-gun media pundits and politicians have leveled a barrage of attacks upon the rights of law-abiding gun owners. Democrats in Congress have been clamoring for more gun control, despite the fact that 19-plus gun laws were not able to stop the two young thugs in Littleton, Colorado. Knowing that the President and Sarah Brady are using the latest tragedy to further slice up the Second Amendment, it is peculiar that Sen. Orrin Hatch has intentionally forced his juvenile justice bill (S. 254) to the floor of the Senate with the express intention of adopting a number of Clinton gun control proposals in order to "politically diffuse the issue." Following are some of the gun control proposals that Senator Hatch has put forth (in his name): * A lifetime gun ban for juveniles committing minor gun-related indiscretions at a very young age [Section 441-- Hatch/Craig amendment on page S5310 of the Congressional Record, 5/13/99]; * A precedent-setting requirement that PRIVATE individuals (non-FFLs) at gun shows be subject to mandatory checks and federal regulation [listed in the unnumbered final section in the Hatch/Craig amendment on page S5313 of the Congressional Record, 5/13/99]; * Extending the arcane and confusing juvenile handgun ban to semi-autos, which are used in less than 2% of serious crimes [Section 451 of the Hatch/Craig amendment on page S5310-S5311 of the Congressional Record, 5/13/99]; * Designating and funding U.S. Attorney personnel to harass gun owners [Sections 403-405 of the Hatch/Craig amendment on page S5309 of the Congressional Record, 5/13/99]; * Increasing penalties for violating the almost incomprehensible regulations governing the circumstances under which you may legally take your kid hunting or target shooting with a handgun or semi-auto [Section 451 of the Hatch/Craig amendment on page S5310-11 of the Congressional Record, 5/13/99]. Hatch packaged these gun control proposals into one amendment and brought it to the floor today (5/14/99). His anti-gun amendment passed by one vote-- 48 to 47. Thankfully, there were pro-gun Senators like Bob Smith (R-NH) and Conrad Burns (R-MT) that were not fooled by Hatch and voted against this anti-gun travesty. As debate over Hatch's crime bill has tarried, sources in the U.S. Senate report that Hatch is now threatening to move to table (or kill) pro-gun amendments that might endanger the passage of his anti-gun bill. Specifically, the pro-gun Sen. Bob Smith (R-NH) has publicly stated that he intends to offer pro-2nd Amendment amendments to the Hatch bill. Debate on the crime bill will commence on Mon., with votes expected on Tues. HERE'S WHAT TO DO: * Please contact Sen. Hatch and ask him to pull his bill from the floor [toll-free: 888-449-3511; regular phone: 202-224-5251; fax: 202-224-6331; e-mail: senator_hatch@hatch.senate.gov]. If this juvenile crime bill passes, it will be "Christmas in May" for President Clinton and Sarah Brady-- as it gives them many of the things they are currently seeking. * Tell Hatch you will be watching to see if he actually does make good on his incredible threat of tabling (or killing) pro-gun amendments, such as the amendment by Bob Smith to stop the anti-gun lawsuits. * Remember GOA's Guide to Grassroots Lobbying: "The person caught with his hand in the cookie jar is the person most likely to insist he wasn't looking for cookies." Sen. Hatch has always relied upon Second Amendment supporters, and thus, his office may try to deny that he is "raiding the cookie jar." Regardless of his spin, insist that he take the Second Amendment off the bargaining table. Our rights are not negotiable! ************** Did someone else forward this to you? To be certain of getting up to date information, please consider subscribing to the GOA E-Mail Alert Network directly. There is no cost or obligation, and the volume of mail is quite low. To subscribe, simply send a message to goamail@gunowners.org and include the state in which you live, in either the subject or the body. To unsubscribe, reply to any alert and ask to be removed. - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 May 1999 22:11:57 -0600 From: "S. Thompson" Subject: ALERT! Interim May 19th Agendas Feel free to forward this alert to those who may find it of interest, but please do not "spam" people! Reminder: This Wednesday, May 19, plan to attend the interim legislative session at the Capitol. The focus will be on further destroying the rights of law-abiding firearms owners as well as law-abiding and non-violent people who have the misfortune to suffer from mental illness, while endangering the lives of our children and other innocent people. In the moring is the Education Committee, agenda below. It appears that only those who have a proven track record of supporting gun control will be asked to testify. In other words, if you don't make your own voice heard, no one is going to speak up for you! In the afternoon is a joint meeting of the Judiciary and Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice committees, agenda also below. Once again the testimony is heavily stacked against _rights_, with only the nominally pro-gun Utah Shooting Sports Council testifying for gun rights (we hope!), and no one to testify againt proposals to create a database of the mentally ill, forced psychiatric drugging, and other anti-freedom proposals. Please try to attend at least one of the hearings. If that is not possible (and I realize it's hard for many people to take off from work on a Wednesday), please contact committee members and your own legislators and let them know how you would like them to vote. Also, PLEASE call Governor Leavitt's office and tell him you OPPOSE a special session of the legislature. 801-538-1000 Further information is available at: www.le.state.ut.us Thanks! Sarah TO: Education Interim Committee FROM: J. Wayne Lewis, Research Analyst DATE: May 6, 1999 SUBJECT: May 19, 1999 Meeting Senator David H. Steele and Representative Lloyd Frandsen have scheduled a meeting of the Education Interim Committee as follows: DATE: May 19, 1999 TIME: 9:00 a. m. PLACE: Room 303 State Capitol An agenda is included. If you are unable to attend, please call me or Jim Wilson at 538-1032. COMMITTEE MEMBERS Sen. David H. Steele, Senate Chair Rep. Lloyd Frandsen, House Chair Sen. Ron Allen Sen. Karen Hale Sen. Lyle W. Hillyard Sen. Howard A. Stephenson Rep. Jeff Alexander Rep. Ron Bigelow Rep. Duane Bourdeaux Rep. Judy Ann Buffmire Rep. Fred J. Fife III Rep. James R. Gowans Rep. David L. Hogue Rep. Bradley T. Johnson Rep. Keele Johnson Rep. Evan L. Olsen Rep. Tammy J. Rowan Rep. LaWanna "Lou" Shurtliff Rep. Nora B. Stephens Rep. Matt Throckmorton Rep. Bill Wright PROPOSED AGENDA EDUCATION INTERIM COMMITTEE Wednesday, May 19, 1999 - 9:00 a.m. - Room 303 State Capitol Building 9:00 a.m. 1. Call to Order 9:05 a.m. 2. Committee Business a. Elementary Counselors Site Visit Proposal b. Approval of September 23, 1998 and April 21,1999 Minutes 9:10 a.m. 3. Review of School Safety Laws - Legislative Leadership Request 9:20 a.m. a. Background Issues to School Safety - Legislative Staff b. School Safety Review Participants (1) State Office of Education (2) School Superintendent's Association (3) Local Superintendent (4) Representative Patrice Arent (5) PTA (6) UEA c. Questions to All Participants: (1) Is there a problem with school safety? (2) What is the problem(s)? (3) What are the probable causes? (4) Examples of early intervention. (5) Solutions that have been or could be implemented. 9:50a.m. d. Summary: Educational and Legislative Proposals to Prevent Future Problems 10:00 a.m. 4. Review 1999 Interim Assignments and Discussion Format a. School Counselors b. Public Education Capitol Outlay Act c. School Environments d. School Innovations e. Educational Adequacy f. Professional Development g. State and Local Board Responsibilities 12:00 a.m. 5. Adjournment *************************** Sen. Michael G. Waddoups and Rep. Blake D. Chard have scheduled a joint meeting of the Judiciary and Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Interim Committees as follows: DATE: Wednesday, May 19, 1999 TIME: 2:00 p.m. PLACE: Room 303 State Capitol (Note Room Change) An agenda is included. If you are unable to attend, please call me or Angela Kelley at 538-1032. COMMITTEE MEMBERS Sen. Michael G. Waddoups, Senate Chair Rep. Blake D. Chard, House Chair Sen. Paula F. Julander Sen. L. Alma "Al" Mansell Rep. Trisha Beck Rep. Duane Bourdeaux Rep. DeMar "Bud" Bowman Rep. Perry L. Buckner Rep. David L. Hogue Rep. Susan J. Koehn Rep. Carl R. Saunders Rep. Marlon O. Snow Rep. Nora B. Stephens AGENDA JUDICIARY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE INTERIM COMMITTEES Wednesday, May 19, 1999 - 2:00 p.m. - Room 303 State Capitol 1. Committee Business . Approval of minutes of the April 21, 1999 meetings 2. Review of Current State and Federal Laws and Procedures . Tani Pack Downing, Associate General Counsel 3. Possible Strategies to Reduce Gun Violence . Chyleen A. Arbon, Research Analyst 4. Recommendations from Various Entities . Meredith Alden, Director, Utah Division of Mental Health . Rev. Jeffery Sells, Ph.D., Episcopal Diocese of Utah . Elwood Powell, Chair, Utah Shooting Sports Council . William Nash, Chair, Utahns Against Gun Violence . Commissioner Craig Dearden, Utah Department of Public Safety 5. Committee Discussion and Future Focus 6. Other Items / Adjourn leg-alerts is owned and distributed by Sarah Thompson, M.D. The opinions in this alert represent those of the list owner only, unless otherwise attributed or specified. To subscribe to leg-alerts send a message to: majordomo@aros.net in the body of the message put: subscribe leg-alerts PLEASE REMEMBER THAT YOU CANNOT POST TO THIS LIST! Send comments, alerts, suggestions, etc. to: righter@therighter.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 May 1999 22:44:20 -0600 From: "S. Thompson" Subject: Copycats Sent to the Deseret News: Dear Editors: I realize that you reserve the right to "edit" letters for brevity and clarity. However, editing out the single most important sentence of a letter in order to entirely change its meaning and validity belies the Deseret News's claims to present "fair and balanced" coverage. Your "editing" of my letter (original below) to delete scientific evidence, combined with your omission of my academic credentials, left readers with the impression that my conclusions were based on nothing more than "coincidence", or the wishful thinking of an uninformed person. Since I was careful to limit the letter to barely over 100 words, this was entirely unjustified. While I appreciate your publication of my letters, I would ask that in the future you refrain from editing sense into nonsense. Thank you. Sarah Thompson, M.D. ORIGINAL LETTER: I was intrigued to learn that Vermont is the only state in the country in which a teenager had neither threatened nor attempted a massacre. Vermont is also the only state that respects the right of all adults to carry concealed firearms without the need for a permit. Is this a coincidence? Probably not. A recent study by Lott and Landes of the University of Chicago concludes: "...concealed handgun or shall issue laws reduce the number of multiple victim public shootings". The Deseret News is correct in recommending that we seek to follow the good examples of others. Utah would do well to "copycat" Vermont's effective firearms laws, rather than further disarming innocent victims. Sarah Thompson, M.D. - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 13:24:27 -0600 From: charles hardy Subject: DesNews Poll needs anti gun control votes Folks, may I humbly suggest that as bad as anyone may consider the "options" in the current DesNews poll, having the one blatant gun control option move into second place is far worse. Please, if you have not yet voted for some reason log in and vote for "special training" so that gun control is at least 3rd place and not 2nd. If you've got some other friends who have not voted, ask them to vote for whatever option is currently the closest following after gun control. It will be to our detriment in gun control is allowed to remain in the top 3 vote getters on this poll. The very fact the DesNews has left this poll up so long versus their previous gun control poll (which went against gun control) indicates to me they are currently pleased with the results and will likely use them against us in some way. Current results: Question: Concerned about school safety, Utah school districts and boards are taking steps to prevent violent outbreaks. What procedure do you think would be most effective? In-school police 393 votes (32%) Special training 212 votes (17%) Security cameras 189 votes (15%) Social workers 98 votes (8%) Ban of weapons 217 votes (18%) After-school groups 130 votes (10%) ================================================================== Charles C. Hardy ___________________________________________________________________ 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/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] - - ------------------------------ End of utah-firearms-digest V2 #135 ***********************************