From: owner-utah-firearms-digest@lists.xmission.com (utah-firearms-digest) To: utah-firearms-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: utah-firearms-digest V2 #149 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, July 29 1999 Volume 02 : Number 149 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 25 Jul 99 22:16:00 -0700 From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: FW: The Filibuster Is * On * - ----- From: Gun Owners of America Sent: Friday, July 23, 1999 6:37 PM To: goamail@gunowners.org Subject: The Filibuster Is * On * Senator Smith Throws Down the Gauntlet! -- Stands up to Trent Lott by forcing filibuster on anti-gun crime bill 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 (Friday, July 23, 1999) -- Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-MS) has set the Senate wheels in motion for a series of votes to stop Senator Bob Smith's filibuster on the juvenile crime legislation. The first vote has been set for Monday, July 26. So far, Senator Smith (I-NH) has prevented any progress on the anti-gun crime bill by promising to use the ancient art of "filibuster." Yesterday, that promise became reality when Smith objected to a motion by Sen. Lott to move the bill along. This is truly a David v. Goliath stand-off. The Senate leadership, led by the Majority Leader, is trying to roll Senator Smith and bring his delaying tactics to an end. Of course, Senator Lott must first clear at least six parliamentary "hurdles" that have been erected by Senator Smith. The key vote will occur on Wednesday or Thursday when the Senate will determine whether the Gore/Lautenberg gun control crime bill (S. 254) will move forward. That vote will be on an effort to shut down debate on Sen. Smith's filibuster-- known in Washington as "invoking cloture" on the filibuster-- and will decide whether Sen. Lott can substitute the virulently anti-gun crime bill (S. 254) in lieu of the crime bill that was passed by the House. Eventually, Senator Lott wants to send the crime legislation to a House-Senate conference committee to iron out the differences between the two bills. But that can only come after he's cleared the Smith "hurdles"-- a process that should take several days. Lott can clear each one of these hurdles with a 60-vote majority in the Senate. If that happens, President Clinton will be one step closer to signing a crime bill that is replete with gun bans and gun owner registration. But if our side gets 41 votes at any point along the way, then Senate rules will allow Smith to continue filibustering the bill-- which could entail his standing on the Senate floor and reading long passages from a library of pro-gun literature. You may want to tape this from C-Span and label it "Second Amendment books on tape by Senator Smith." Smith is willing to do that. He is committed to doing whatever it takes to defend the 2nd Amendment. But he needs 40 other Senators to stand with him! Again, Monday's vote will begin a whole series of votes on this issue. Each one is slightly different, and GOA will do its best to keep you informed as to what is coming down the pike. Until then, please start asking your Senators to support the Smith filibuster. Senator Smith is without question THE defender of 2nd Amendment rights in the Senate. Tell your Senator that you would like him or her to follow Smith's lead on the upcoming series of votes. CONTACT INFORMATION: * Toll-free at 1-888-449-3511. [Please be patient when calling this number; sometimes it rings for quite a while. But they will answer!] * The regular Capitol Switchboard number is 202-224-3121. * Fax and e-mail contact info is available at http://www.gunowners.org/s106th.htm on the GOA webpage. P.S. There has been quite a bit of confusion in the media as to what is actually transpiring on Monday. Some in the media are reporting that Monday's vote is about the appointment of Senate conferees. This is incorrect. Technically speaking, the purpose for Monday's vote in the Senate is to bring up the House crime bill (H.R. 1501) for debate. As stated above, Lott eventually wants to appoint conferees, but that will only happen if he can overcome every Smith filibuster. Cheaper Than Dirt donates a percentage of your total order to GOA if you use http://www.cheaperthandirt.com/goa.htm to enter their online store. 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, 25 Jul 99 22:42:00 -0700 From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: How gun show was shut down http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_dougherty/19990716_xnjdo_how_gun_sh.shtml [WorldNetDaily] FRIDAY JULY 16 1999 [WND Exclusive ] How gun show was shut down FBI turns off insta-check system, halts business By Jon E. Dougherty =A9 1999 WorldNetDaily.com Despite a turnout of "record numbers" of people at the Crossroads Gun Show in Phoenix, Ariz., not one gun dealer sold a single firearm. That's because earlier in the day on Sunday, July 11, the Federal Bureau of Investigation turned off its instant background database system for, according to a source who spoke with FBI officials, "routine maintenance." As a result, dealers were not able to perform the required background checks on potential customers and, hence, could not sell any guns. "In what seemed like an arbitrary and capricious attack on U.S. commerce, the FBI, without warning, closed gun shows and the firearms business in general," said Alan Korwin, noted gun law expert and an opponent of the FBI's background check system, who attended the Phoenix event. Korwin is the author of "Gun Laws of America," a reference almanac that lists every state and federal law pertaining to firearms in the country. The move sparked widespread anger and resentment from local Phoenix firearm dealers and patrons alike, as well as charges of an anti-gun conspiracy by the federal government. Though Korwin admitted the move was dubious, he told WorldNetDaily there was "absolutely no evidence" that the FBI "maliciously" turned off NICS "for the sole purpose of thwarting national gun sales." However, he said, "Did the FBI know such a move would thwart gun sales? Of course they had to know that because they're not stupid. I'm just saying I don't know if the move was malicious or conspiratorial." The system, which is known as the National Instant (Background) Check System, or NICS, is a result of the Brady Law, which mandated such a system by Nov. 30, 1998. Specifically, it is a computer database located in Clarksburg, W.Va., and is used to "check available records on persons who are disqualified from receiving firearms." Clinton administration advocates have touted the system as a legitimate crime-fighting tool. Critics of the system, however, claim that NICS is a waste of taxpayer money and violates Second Amendment restrictions on the "infringement" of the right to keep and bear -- and purchase -- firearms. At the Phoenix event, Korwin said that although licensed dealers were unable to sell firearms, private transactions between individuals occurred. "And as you know," he added, "there currently is a move to close that so-called loophole in the law as well." President Clinton, Vice President Al Gore and a number of Republican lawmakers have recently said they will seek legislation mandating that all firearms transactions -- including those at gun shows -- also be subjected to a NICS check. Korwin said the most frustrating aspect of the July 11 incident was that gun dealers "had no prior knowledge" that the system would be shut down. "That was quite a surprise" to dealers, he said. But he added, "I don't think any attention was paid, that I'm aware of, that this action could put people out of business by stopping commerce. It was government regulation of free enterprise in a way that had never been done." According to the FBI's own "fact sheet" on the NICS system, "In accordance with the Brady Act, the NICS shall allow Federal Firearms Licensees ... to contact the system by telephone or by other electronic means in addition to the telephone, for information, to be supplied immediately." If the gun buyer has no disqualifying criminal record, the transaction is approved and a "NICS transaction number" (NTN) is assigned to the purchase. "If the FBI determines that disqualifying information exists on the prospective purchaser," the rules state, "the Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL) will be advised that the transfer may not proceed and will be given an NTN to record on the ATF Form 4473 and retain the form for auditing purposes." States can also decide if they want FFLs to contact a state agency for sales approval instead of the federal government. Korwin said that in the event the NICS system is down for any reason, the Brady law "only requires its use if it is up and running." He said gun dealers may sell guns without a background check if the system is down, "but dealers don't do that because they are terrified of reprisals by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms" - -- the agency primarily responsible for regulating firearms sales. He also said the NICS system "has been temporarily down before, but never for a full day." "I've asked them for information on their down time," he said, "but so far I haven't gotten any." Typically, he said, the system "glitches" from time to time, which does not suggest any duplicity on the part of the FBI. On the other hand, he added, when the system is down it is costly for gun dealers. "There are some 23,000 guns sold daily in this country, so you can imagine the economic impact" of repeated system glitches or prolonged down time, Korwin said. He also said the Arizona show promoter, Bob Templeton, "spoke with the FBI (on the day of the Phoenix show) and Templeton told me the FBI had shut off the NICS system for the day." Templeton could not be reached for comment. Also, an attempt was made by WorldNetDaily to fax a list of questions to the FBI facility in West Virginia, per the agency's request, without success. Korwin questioned the necessity of the NICS system on the whole, and said the weekend shut down illustrates why it is important to prevent the government from overregulating the firearms industry. - ------- Jon E. Dougherty is a senior writer and columnist for WorldNetDaily, as well as a morning co-host of Daybreak America. - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 15:27:13 -0600 From: charles hardy Subject: Gun turn-in in SLC I wonder if any effort will be made to make sure a gun isn't stolen and to return it to its rightful owner before it is destroyed or how many murderers will have their evidence destroyed for them, no questions asked? From today's DesNews: S.L. residents get plea: Turn in surplus weapons The Salt Lake Police Department is launching a campaign to get as many guns off the street as possible. Residents are urged to bring unwanted and unused weapons to the Public Safety Building at 315 E. 200 South to turn them in. All weapons will be destroyed to decrease the availability of firearms for unlawful use or accidental injury by mishandling. The police department joins other agencies that in the past have initiated gun relinquishment campaigns in an effort to deter street violence. Guns remain a popular item stolen in burglaries of homes and cars. In many cases, they are later sold or traded on the streets for drugs. ================================================================== Charles C. Hardy ___________________________________________________________________ Get the Internet just the way you want it. Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month! Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj. - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 00:02:36 -0600 From: "S. Thompson" Subject: Kids and Guns - --=====================_35679208==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed http://www.infobeat.com/stories/cgi/story.cgi?id=2560452277-cb4 How can this be? Vermont isn't a safe place for raising children - people there carry GUNS! Wouldn't kids be safer someplace like Washington, D.C. with its strict gun control laws? - ---------- 10:45 AM ET 07/27/99 Maine Is Best for Raising Children Maine Is Best for Raising Children By CHRIS GOSIER= Associated Press Writer= PORTLAND, Maine (AP) _ Compiling data on factors ranging from immunization to juvenile crime, a national advocacy group concluded that Maine is the best state in which to rear a child. Maine advanced from eighth place last year, when Iowa was No. 1 in the rankings compiled by the Children's Rights Council. Behind Maine were Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont and New Hampshire. Bringing up the rear, in descending order, were California, Arizona, Texas, New Mexico, Louisiana and Washington, D.C. The council, based in Washington, was announcing the rankings today. The report measured rates of abuse and neglect; the rate of immunizations under age 2; the dropout rate; children in poverty; the child death rate; the infant mortality rate; those not receiving natal care; total juvenile crime; the divorce rate; and the teen birth rate. The states were ranked by calculating the average of all 10 factors for each. The report draws on data from public and private sources including the FBI, the Department of Health and Human Services, The Annie E. Casey Foundation and state law enforcement agencies. An increase in the high school graduation rate and decreases in the child poverty and teen birth rates helped Maine take the top spot, said Maryellen Dougherty, legislative assistant at the council. The top five slots shifted to New England in part because the council changed its calculation methods to focus more closely on the factors that directly affect children, she said. Data on deaths from drugs and alcohol were dropped because not all affected children, and data on the ones that did were not available. Also, data on single-parent households, unwed births and teen births were found to overlap last year, so the teen birth rate was the only one of the three included this year, she said. ``We felt that that unfairly weighed one area of raising a child,'' she said. Figures on the rates of immunization and prenatal care were included for the first time this year, she said. Maine officials took pride in the No. 1 listing but acknowledged that there's still room for improvement. ``It's nice to be recognized. We're going to pat ourselves on the back a little bit,'' said Dennis Bailey, spokesman for Gov. Angus King. He said King has made child welfare a top priority with programs such as the Children's Cabinet, formed in 1994 to let the heads of five state agencies collaborate on policies affecting parents and children. But he also noted that some areas for improvement aren't shown by the figures, such as those showing a low high-school dropout rate. ``What we don't do well in is the number of graduates going on to college or technical school,'' he said. - ---------- - --=====================_35679208==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" http://www.infobeat.com/stories/cgi/story.cgi?id=2560452277-cb4

How can this be?  Vermont isn't a safe place for raising children - -
people there carry GUNS!  Wouldn't kids be safer someplace like Washington, D.C. with its strict gun control laws?



10:45 AM ET 07/27/99

Maine Is Best for Raising Children

 Maine Is Best for Raising Children
 By CHRIS GOSIER=
 Associated Press Writer=
          
PORTLAND, Maine (AP) _ Compiling data on factors ranging from
 immunization to juvenile crime, a national advocacy group
concluded
 that Maine is the best state in which to rear a child.
          
Maine advanced from eighth place last year, when Iowa was No. 1
 in the rankings compiled by the Children's Rights Council.
          
Behind Maine were Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont and New
 Hampshire. Bringing up the rear, in descending order, were
 California, Arizona, Texas, New Mexico, Louisiana and Washington,
 D.C.
          
The council, based in Washington, was announcing the rankings
 today.
          
The report measured rates of abuse and neglect; the rate of
 immunizations under age 2; the dropout rate; children in poverty;
 the child death rate; the infant mortality rate; those not
 receiving natal care; total juvenile crime; the divorce rate; and
 the teen birth rate.
          
The states were ranked by calculating the average of all 10
 factors for each. The report draws on data from public and 
private
 sources including the FBI, the Department of Health and Human
 Services, The Annie E. Casey Foundation and state law enforcement
 agencies.
          
An increase in the high school graduation rate and decreases in
 the child poverty and teen birth rates helped Maine take the top
 spot, said Maryellen Dougherty, legislative assistant at the
 council.
          
The top five slots shifted to New England in part because the
 council changed its calculation methods to focus more closely on
 the factors that directly affect children, she said.
          
Data on deaths from drugs and alcohol were dropped because not
 all affected children, and data on the ones that did were not
 available. Also, data on single-parent households, unwed births
and
 teen births were found to overlap last year, so the teen birth
rate
 was the only one of the three included this year, she said.
          
``We felt that that unfairly weighed one area of raising a
 child,'' she said.
          
Figures on the rates of immunization and prenatal care were
 included for the first time this year, she said.
          
Maine officials took pride in the No. 1 listing but acknowledged
 that there's still room for improvement.
          
``It's nice to be recognized. We're going to pat ourselves on
 the back a little bit,'' said Dennis Bailey, spokesman for Gov.
 Angus King.
          
He said King has made child welfare a top priority with programs
 such as the Children's Cabinet, formed in 1994 to let the heads 
of
 five state agencies collaborate on policies affecting parents and
 children.
          
But he also noted that some areas for improvement aren't shown
 by the figures, such as those showing a low high-school dropout
 rate.
          
``What we don't do well in is the number of graduates going on
 to college or technical school,'' he said.
           
          
- --=====================_35679208==_.ALT-- - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 99 12:15:00 -0700 From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: FW: Communications with Phyllis Sorensen on Guns. - ----- Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 15:57:50 -0600 From: "Jim Dexter" To: lputah@qsicorp.com Subject: FW: Communications with Phyllis Sorensen on Guns. This is an interesting exchange. Start at the bottom - ---------- To All: Perhaps my recent communications with UEA Pres. Phyllis Sorensen will be helpful to you as you deal with others of this mindset. Maybe I have no tact or discretion, but I think it is time to call the sick bluff of these lunatics and let them begin to feel the heat. Mr. Black >Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 14:09:21 -0600 >To: Phyllis Sorensen >From: "Mr. Black" >Subject: Re: A Concerned Parent Who Can't Understand What You Are Doing. >In-Reply-To: <19990727030808.28316.rocketmail@web205.mail.yahoo.com> >Sorensen, >Agree to disagree? AGREE TO DISAGREE?! Have you ever sent one of your own children to a dangerous school? Have you ever been robbed or otherwise molested? Have you ever personally felt helpless when confronted by violence directed at you or your children?! >I was the second person on the scene of the Murray bank robbery a few weeks ago and spent several minutes trying to keep a "licensed, trained law enforcement officer" from bleeding to death because he couldn't stop 2 punks from filling him full of bullet holes. I held his guts in my hands and watched his face turn white because the ambulance and his back-up weren't getting there fast enough! Where were your precious law enforcement officers to save the day, hmm?! >If this had occured in a school, what would you and your angelic squad of unarmed nurturers have done?! You would have done the same thing the teachers did in Colorado -- run like hell while they gunned down our children! And, like at Columbine, you would probably wait outside singing hymns for 4 hours while listening to the screams of children being butchered. Why? Because the police would probably again be too stupid to let anyone with a gun go into the building and try to rescue them; and also too stupid to trust law-abiding, responsible teachers and adults with firearms to deter crime and protect our children in the first place!!! >I can tell you with 100% certainty that even when police ARE there, they often can't stop violence by themselves (my father was a police officer in this state for several years and I also have law enforcement experience). >But you would leave our children utterly defenseless, and publicly proclaim our public schools a relatively risk-free bloodfest for any whacko out there who wants to go in and start shooting them up. You are worse than an idiot in an ivory tower! You are purposely callous and oblivious to human life and common sense! You are sick and demented! Make absolutely certain I am no longer on your e-mail list(s)! >Mr. Black >At 11:08 PM 7/26/1999 -0400, you wrote: >>Thank you for your comments. We'll have to agree to disagree on the >>concealed weapons in schools issue. I have no problem with licensed, >>trained law enforcement officers being in schools and having these >>weapons, but teachers are there to nurture, teach and create a secure >>and safe environment for children. I apologize that it took me so long >>to return an email. I've been out of town. Thanks again. >>--- "Mr. Black" wrote: >>> Phyllis Sorensen, >>> How can you say that guns have no place in schools? >>> Police can't be >>> everywhere. Do you seriously want potential >>> criminals and mental cases to >>> know that our children are unprotected in this day >>> and age? Would you >>> seriously announce to all the nuts of the world that >>> your own home is >>> completely unprotected? Of course not. >>> You are a school teacher and I know you pride >>> yourself on concerning >>> yourself data and facts, right? Phyllis, you need >>> to get the facts about >>> concealed weapons permit holders (by the way, I am >>> NOT one). The fact is >>> that they have never committed a violent crime in >>> the history of the >>> program, but on the other hand, they have stopped >>> thousands of crimes from >>> being committed in Utah and also in other parts of >>> America. >>> Why can't you see that THE MERE CHANCE that a >>> trained, law-abiding adult >>> with a concealed weapons permit MIGHT be at a school >>> is a SERIOUS DETERRENT >>> TO VIOLENT CRIME. Objective research has proved >>> that this deterrent saves >>> the lives of men, women, and children. How can you >>> ignore the research and >>> turn your back on the facts that can save the lives >>> of our children? >>> If you are willing to put aside the fears and >>> emotions that have been >>> ingrained in you long enough to get the very best >>> facts, I am very willing >>> to share them with you. I believe I have made my >>> point and am not >>> interested in arguing. If you are truly an open and >>> honest person, this >>> will be enough for you to investigate further. I >>> hope, for you even more >>> than this issue (I mean that), that you are humble >>> enough to investigate >>> and -- after you have seen the unassailable facts -- >>> that you are also >>> humble enough to publicly reverse your position on >>> concealed weapon permit >>> holders in our schools. >>> Why is this so important to me? Because if you are >>> successful from banning >>> guns from law abiding citizen-adults in Utah, >>> statistics show that your >>> actions will eventually cause the deaths of >>> children. You will then be >>> personally liable for that inevitable tragedy. >>> Mr. Black >>> Salt Lake City >>=== >>Phyllis Sorensen >>Utah Education Association - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 16:05:26 -0600 From: "S. Thompson" Subject: Guns and mental illness For those of you who are unfamiliar with Russ Laing's case... Mr. Laing is a firearms enthusiast and collector who lives in Pennsylvania. In April, 1996 he was involuntarily committed to a psychiatric hospital by the local sheriff's department, and his gun collection was seized. The basis for the commitment was that he had failed to show up for work on time, and hadn't called in, and was therefore "suicidal and dangerous". Under Pennsylvania's Uniform Firearms Act, he was barred from ever possessing a firearm again. That multiple psychiatrists testified that Mr. Laing had no evidence of any mental illness, and that the commitment was improper, was irrelevant; the law said that he couldn't own firearms because he had been committed. This is why we need to be fighting both Gov. Leavitt's gun control proposals and his "mental health" proposals. I suspect that Leavitt knows that he won't get very far with outright gun bans, and is trying to do an end run around our rights by simply disqualifying everyone from owning firearms based on dubious claims of "mental illness" or "violent misdemeanors" (most of which aren't even remotely violent). If he succeeds, what happened to Mr. Laing can (and likely will!) happen to each and every one of us. The good news is that Mr. Laing has won his case, the PA law has been amended, and he has regained custody of his firearms collection. His "victory announcement" follows. *************RUSS LAING RESPONSE: Victory Announcement********* July 27, 1999 Chris Stark Director, Gun Owners Alliance In Re: Russell Laing Case (Gun Confiscation Based on Non-Adjudicated Detention for Psychiatric Observation) Dear Chris, Last night I picked up my entire, totally intact gun collection from the local township police station, where it had been held for the past three years while I fought my way through eight different court systems, and three different criminal prosecuting attorneys from the Allegheny County District Attorneys Office here in Pittsburgh Pennsylvania. I fought for the return of my property, and the right to keep and bear arms, which had been taken from me under the pretext of an involuntary mental health commitment which I was subjected to in April 1996 by a local township policeman acting without a warrant. The return of my property was the final step in a hard-fought battle waged against the Allegheny County District Attorney's Office, represented by Assistant DA Dan Fitzsimmons. Three years ago my first attempts to obtain justice were rebuffed, as DA Fitzsimmons characterized my gun collection as a "veritable arsenal" and argued that the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms did not apply to private citizens. Subsequent appeals to higher courts were denied without ever being heard, based on procedural filing technicalities. An initial attempt to legally challenge the mental health commitment actions by the police was at first rejected by the courts, and then pended for more than a year while deciding whether my petition had been filed on a timely basis. Completely frustrated by a court system that was alternatively hostile or indiffferent to my case, I turned to the grassroots supporters of freedom. Gun Owners Alliance joined the cause by posting several Alerts on the GOA website, which culminated in a flood of e-mails to Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge urging justice for my case; I have received copies of such messages from virtually every state in the union, and some from overseas. What followed was nothing less than miraculous: 1. Pennsylvania amended its Uniform Firearms Act (Act 17 of 1995) with PA Act 70 of 1998, which instantly removed the state provisions barring me from the right to keep and bear arms. (June 1998) 2. I tested the revised law by successfully purchasing firearms and passing PA State Police Instacheck System (July 1998) 3. My previously revoked Liscense to Carry Firearms is reinstated by court order (August 1998) 4. The United States Department of Treasury, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, issues a written ruling on my case in which they declare unconstitutional the Pennsylvania's Firearms law barring gun ownership for individuals who have been subjected to a non-adjudicated detention for psychiatric observation. In their ruling, the BATF states that such laws deny the basic constituional right of due process under the law, a right so fundamental that it pre-dates the formation of this country. (September 1998) 5. The police officer who ordered the siezure and confiscation of my firearms is fired, based upon 21 different charges brought by his supervisor, the Chief of Police. One of these charges is referred to as the "Laing charges" and other allegations include accounts of making false or misleading police reports on other local residents. (early 1999) 6. A lawsuit which I had filed against the police department and the hospital involved in my case is settled in a manner which I found to be very satisfactory. (May 1999) I have no criticism of either the police department or the hospital. I have since spoken directly with the Chief of Police and believe him to be a good and honorable man, as I believe others of his department to be in my interactions with them during the recent return of my property. 7. A court ruling is made that overturns (vacates) the mental health commitment action taken against me, under a statute which states that there was insufficient evidence to support my being detained at all. The same court also orders that my record be expunged, thereby clearing my reputation. (June 1999) 8. In a final dramatic showdown, I renew my original petition for return of my gun collection in the same court where I had started out three years ago, which had then denied my petition. This time, under an avalanche of evidence and testiomony, the anti-gun Assistant DA Fitzsimons is reduced to making a series of snivelling references to my "assault rifles". Judge David Cercone isn't buying any of it, however, and becomes visibly frustrated and angry with DA Fitzsimmon's absurd technical arguments, finally asking him questions like: "What constitutional principle are you basing this on?", and... "What about fairness?". DA Fitzsimmon's closing arguments are hardly more than a barely audible muttered whimper, spoken even as Judge Cercone is reaching over to sign my court order to return my property. I search for a way to thank you, Chris, and the numerous members of Gun Owners Alliance who wrote to Governor Ridge with such power and sincerity. No need anymore to ask Governor Ridge about where Russell Laing's guns are -- they are right here in his lawful possession, along with all of his other constitutional rights. These many freedom-loving patriots brought me the due process that the freedom-robbing anti-gun-hysteria laws of Pennsylvania had denied to me. The weight of the combined voices of free men became so great that even the most untouchable and arrogant gun-grabbers in the District Attorney's Office were shaken right out of their safe little tree of state authority, and believe me they landed on the ground with a resounding thud that was heard all the way from Pittsburgh to Texas! Let's make no mistake, we really clobbered them. And in the end, even though I had a legal means of avoiding it, my case was finally resolved in the very same court system where it had first been initially lost. This time we met the opposition head on, straight up, and with no apologies of any kind. And we won by an overwhelming margin. Please accept my sincere thanks, on behalf of all your members, for their support in my pursuit of justice. May we all be united by our common yearning for freedom. Russ Laing - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Jul 99 11:20:00 -0700 From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: The reason for the Second Amendment 2/2 [ ...Continued From Previous Message ] Advocates of banning guns think we can substitute material things for human self-control, but this approach won't wash. It is the human moral will that saves us from violence, not the presence or absence of weapons. We should reject utterly the absurd theory that weapons are the cause of violence. Consider, for example, the phony assertion that certain weapons should be banned because "they have no purpose except to kill people." It is people that kill people, and they can use countless kinds of weapons to do so, if killing is in their hearts where love of justice should be. This week a 7-year old boy in Chicago apparently used a pair of underwear to commit murder, because he wanted a bike. So let's get down to the real issue: are we moral adults, or are we moral children? If we are adults, then we have the capacity to control our will even in the face of passion, and to be responsible for the exercise of our natural rights. If we are only children, then all the particularly dangerous toys must be controlled by the government. But this "solution" implies that we can trust government with a monopoly on guns, even though we cannot trust ourselves with them. This is not a "solution" I trust. Anyone who is serious about controlling violence must recognize that it can only be done by rooting violence out of the human heart. That's why I don't understand those who say "save us from guns," even while they cling to the coldly violent doctrine that human life has no worth except what they "choose" to assign to it. If we want to end violence in our land, we must warm the hearts of all Americans with a renewed dedication to the God-given equality of all human beings. We must recapture the noble view of man as capable of moral responsibility and self-restraint -- of assuming responsibility for governing himself. This is the real meaning of the 2nd Amendment, and indeed of the entire American project of ordered liberty. It is the business of every citizen to preserve justice in his heart, and the material capacity, including arms, to resist tyranny. These things constitute our character as a free people, which it is our duty to maintain. And to fulfill our duty to be such a people we shall have to return to the humble subjection to the authority of true moral principle that characterized our Founders, and that characterized every generation of Americans, until now. We must regain control of ourselves. Most deeply, then, the assertion of 2nd Amendment rights is the assertion that we intend to control ourselves, and submit to the moral order that God has decreed must govern our lives. And just as we have no right to shirk our duty to submit to that moral order, so we have no right to shirk our duty to preserve unto ourselves the material means to discipline our government, if necessary, so that it remains a fit instrument for the self-government of a free people. The preservation of 2nd Amendment rights, for the right reasons, is a moral and public duty of every citizen. The Clinton Administration's flirtations with executive tyranny should remind us that we have a duty to remain capable of disciplining our government if necessary. Bill Clinton's comprehensive avoidance of personal responsibility for his own actions, and our revulsion at the kind of character which that avoidance has produced in him, should be a kind of horrific preview of the kind of people we will all become if we continue to let our government treat us as though we were incapable of moral self-control. And Senator Smith's successful effort to defeat several policies that treat us that way is precisely the kind of principled defense of our liberty -- and of the premises of our liberty - -- that make him so worthy to be a representative of a free people. Alan Keyes Web Site is http://www.AlanKeyes.com Send e-mail to Alan Keyes Go to Alan Keyes' Archive Go to WND Exclusives Archive Go to Page One c 1998 Western Journalism Center This page was last built 8/14/98; 12:46:47 AM Site scripted with UserLand Frontier Direct corrections and technical inquiries to matlanta@mindspring.com <> (Forwarded for information purposes only - K. Furrer) - - ------------------------------ End of utah-firearms-digest V2 #149 ***********************************