From: owner-utah-firearms-digest@lists.xmission.com (utah-firearms-digest) To: utah-firearms-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: utah-firearms-digest V2 #211 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, May 17 2001 Volume 02 : Number 211 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:55:11 -0400 (EDT) From: charles hardy Subject: FW: Gun Control and Crime Control Some links to lots of reading material... - ------Original Message------ Here are hotlinks to some of the best and most recent research on gun control and crime control from the nation's leading think tanks. - ------------------------------- Gun Control and Crime Control Public Health and Gun Control Miguel A. Faria, Jr., MD Association of American Physicians and Surgeons Spring 2001, 3pp. Request document #1328102 http://www.heartland.org/PDF/13281b.pdf Firearm Registration & the Slippery Slope in Canada Gary Mauser Fraser Institute, March 2001, 3pp. Request document #1328103 http://www.heartland.org/PDF/13281c.pdf The Gun Show Loophole H. Sterling Burnett National Center for Policy Analysis February 2001, 2pp. Request document #1328101 http://www.heartland.org/PDF/13281a.pdf Texas Exile: Gun Crime Means Hard Time Hon. John Cornyn (Attorney General, Texas) Texas Public Policy Foundation Fall, 2000 Texas Public Policy Foundation Request document #1328134 http://www.heartland.org/PDF/1328bh.pdf - --------------------------- These four documents available as PDF files on Heartland's Web site or by fax from PolicyFax represent the best, most current thinking on the subject, and just a few of the 7,000 documents from 300 organizations available through Heartland. You will need Adoble Acrobat Reader software--a free and easy-to-use program--to access these files. It is available at http://www.adobe.com/prodindex/acrobat/readstep.html#reader. (AOL users must paste the URL into the keyword or browser window.) - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 20:19:26 -0400 (EDT) From: charles hardy Subject: Utah State Constitution documents FWIW, I recently went looking for a single, electronic version of the current Utah State Constitution. I was not able to find one, so I went ahead and created one from the web pages at the state legislative site. I now have the document in 3 formats: 1-MS Word 2000 with a full table of contents listing each article and section. 2-An HTML format which is just the MS Word 2000 auto convert. The table of contents converted to links to the referenced section. 3-An iSilo version for handheld Palm type devices. This was an auto convert from the previous HTML format and is a single, LONG page with the links intact. iSilo is required to read this version. If anyone would like a copy of these, either for their own use or to put on a web page somewhere, let me know and I'll email them to you. I believe they are accurate, but if anyone is willing to look them over and make sure I've not missed any sections (some section numbers look to be unused on the State web page) that would be great. The files are large, 380KB, 600KB, and 51KB, respectively for the 3 formats. The MS doc is 52 pages including about 6 pages for the table of contents. Due to the size, I will not post any of the files to the list. Let me know individually if you'd like one or if you happen to know of a nicely formatted version somewhere on the web already. Thanks. Charles. - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 11:19:20 -0600 From: "Scott Bergeson" Subject: SUPPORT H.R.1762 - Second Amendment Protection Act SUPPORT H.R.1762 - Second Amendment Protection Act Rep. Ron Paul of Texas has introduced H.R.1762 "To restore the Second Amendment rights of all Americans." This proposal would: 1) Repeal the Brady Handgun Control Act and waiting periods; 2) Repeal the semi-auto assault weapon and high capacity magazine bans; and 3) eliminate the language allowing the BATF to ban guns "not suitable for sporting purposes". This bill has been referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. Contact the members of the committee to support this bill! http://capwiz.com/kba/dbq/officials/directory/directory.dbq?command=congdir Also, this bill has no cosponsors. Contact your U.S. Representative to cosponsor this bill! http://capwiz.com/kba/dbq/officials Read the text of the bill here: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:H.R.1762: Second Amendment Protection Act of 2001 (Introduced in the House) HR 1762 IH 107th CONGRESS 1st Session H. R. 1762 To restore the second amendment rights of all Americans. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES May 8, 2001 Mr. PAUL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- A BILL To restore the second amendment rights of all Americans. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the `Second Amendment Protection Act of 2001'. SEC. 2. REPEAL OF FEDERAL HARASSMENT PERIOD. Public Law 103-159 is hereby replaced, and any provisions of law amended or repealed by such Act are restored or revived as if such Act had not been enacted. SEC. 3. REPEAL OF UNCONSTITUTIONAL GUN BAN. Title XI of Public Law 103-322 is hereby repealed, and any provisions of law amended or repealed by such title are restored or revived as if such title had not been enacted. SEC. 4. REPEAL OF UNCONSTITUTIONAL DISTINCTION. (a) Section 201 of title 11 of Public Law 90-618 is amended by striking `which the Secretary finds is generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes,' and `which the owner intends to use solely for sporting purposes.' (b) Public Law 90-351, as amended, is amended as follows: (1) In section 902, strike `which the Secretary finds is generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes,' `which the owner intends to use solely for sporting, recreational, or cultural purposes,' `a projectile which the Secretary finds is primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes,' `devoted to the collection, competitive use, or other sporting use of firearms in the community,' `determined by the Secretary of the Treasury to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes and,' `(A) determined by the Secretary to be generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes, or determined by the Department of Defense to be a type of firearm normally classified as a war souvenir, and (B),' `and is generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes,' and `provided that such handguns are generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes,'. (2) Strike `lawful sporting purposes' and insert in lieu thereof `lawful purposes'. SEC. 5. EFFECTIVE DATE. The provisions of this Act shall take effect immediately upon enactment. - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 19:19:24 -0400 (EDT) From: charles hardy Subject: FWD: [LPUtah] Million Marxist Moms An interesting view behind the scenes into what you see on TV when it comes to our RKBA... - ------Original Message------ From: Gunnfixer@cs.com Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 16:23:39 EDT Subject: Many Misguied Morons in Escondido, CA To: FreedomNewz@cs.com Million Marxist Moms in Escondido, California - less than 150 in attendance I went to Escondido yesterday, I met up with the TRT/SAS-AIM along with many unaffiliated, yet concerned citizens, and we protested outside one of the Many Marxist Moms rallies. The Commie Mommies pretended not to see our signs, and some were very hostile. This was to be the crown jewel for the MMM as it was their main event in Southern California, yet they were only able to draw less than 150 people (my final head count was 141). If they can only draw 141 in Southern California, that would explain why they have gone into hiding in Michigan. The Counter-Protest was somewhere between 30 and 50 people, it was hard to keep track as we were spread pretty thin. We had folks on the street in front of the Park, as well as in front of the main entrance of the amphitheater. We had some American flags, Gadsden flags, I had my bullet riddled UN flag with a red circle and a slash painted through it along with whole bunch of signs. The "March" lasted from 1:00-2:00pm. I broadcast my Internet radio show for the first 40 minutes (would have been an hour had the battery on my cell phone not given up the ghost) from inside the amphitheater. I had made up a bogus press pass on my computer, so they foolishly let me in (it was kinda like the rancher letting the wolf into his pasture full of sheep). They has "information packages" that they were giving out to the press, but they refused to give on to me, because I was "pro-gun media." I wandered about inside conducting impromptu interviews with some of the cattle inside. One of them was a school teacher and when I posed questions to her that she didn't like (logical questions to her emotional outbursts) she got so flummoxed I thought she was gong to hit me! At that point someone snitched on me, and for the rest of my stay inside the amphitheater I was shadowed by one of Escondido's finest. At about 20 minutes passed 1:00 I saw the wheels of propaganda in motion. All of the camera crews up to this point has been idle, and not shot any footage. When the Head Communist for the San Diego Chapter moved to the podium (I thought that the speeches were about to begin). She asked everyone to converge on the center section on seats. You see the amphitheater seating is semicircular in design, and since the theater will hold roughly 800-900 people it looked rather empty. As soon as the sheep were herded into the center column of seats the cameras set up, and took very tight shots of the "crowd" to make it look like their were more people than there were. One the evening news most of the networks used the term "hundreds of supporters" while we the pro-gun folk were "a handful of protesters." When the propaganda speeches finally began it took them less than 30 seconds to bring out the lies about "gun deaths". Remember last year when their favorite stat was that "13 kids die every day? Well this year, they pared it down to 10, since we showed that it was a lie. HCI considers a 25 year old gangbanger who is shot by the police during the commission of a crime to be a child for use in the previously mentioned statistic. They seem to have a hard time keeping their story straight. In one speech, they drag out the tired old stat about 10 kids per day, and 3 minutes later thay claim that 81 kids died last year in California due to guns.......hmmmm. Something doesn't add up. First they say that 10 kids per day nationwide die every day, but only 81 in California (the sate with the highest population). Boy, they must be dropping like flies in South Dakota. The "news" crews eventually made their way over to the TRT/SAS-AIM folks, to get some footage of them, and some short interviews. I gave about 4 minutes to KSWB, another pro-gunner gave about the same amount to the local FOX affiliate, all of which ended up on the cutting room floor. I watched KSWB that night (I am just a little vain, I wanted to see my ugly mug on TV), and counted the amount of time they gave to each side of the issue. 58 seconds to the MMM, and 7 seconds to the TRT/SAS-AIM. Tell me they don't have an agenda. The entire protest was relatively peaceful, (aside from me mooing and baaaaing at the herd inside) until the end, when the police left, one of the MMM supporters (who turned out to be a 16 year old kid) drove up in his Toyota 4Runner and hollered out his window that the Second Amendment was written during a time of war, and was out dated. Time of war?!? I guess he is just a shinning example of why we need to get the government out of the education business. He then flipped the "bird," you know... the bad finger, drove off erratically speeding through the parking lot, and attempted to run over one of the TRTers, swerving away with only inches to spare. The little jerk and his sidekick were stopped by police a few minutes later when one TRT flagged down a cop, but they only got a written warning and a stern look. I wonder what would have happened if I pretended to run some of those moms down, I think I would be in jail right now, and rightfully so. The police were immediately hostile to the TRT people who were intent on pressing assault charges, but Lt. Coleman, and Sgt. Christensen of the Escondido Police Department refused to do their job, and they let the little felon go with absolutely no consequences for his actions aside from having a finger waved in his direction with a police officer behind it saying, "no, no, no, running people over is bad...naughty, naughty." The driver's excuse for driving the way he did, was that he was trying to escape a confrontation...Liar. He was the one who stopped to harass and harangue the TRTers. We were standing in the parking lot more than 30 feet away from his vehicle (which outweighed the TRTers by more than 3,000 lbs). God Help this Republic. - -------------------------------------------------------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 17:32:30 -0600 From: Scott Bergeson Subject: FW: The Parable of the Sheeple The Parable of the Sheeple by Charles Riggs [w/edits] Not so long ago and in a pasture too uncomfortably close to here, a flock of sheeple lived and grazed. They were protected by a large, fighter dog, who answered to the shepherd, but despite his best lone efforts from time to time a nearby large pack of wolves would successfully prey upon outer fringes of the flock. One day a group of sheeple, bolder than the rest, met to discuss their dilemma. 'Our dog is good, and vigilant, but he is one and the wolves are many. The wolves he catches are not always killed, and the shepherd judges and releases many to prey again upon us, for no reason we can understand. What can we do? We are sheep, but we do not wish to be food, too!' One sheeple spoke up, saying 'It is his fangs and claws that make the wolf so terrible to us. It is his nature to prey, and he would find any way to do it, but it is the tools he wields that make it possible. If we had such fangs and claws, we could fight back and stop this savagery.' The other sheeple clamored in agreement. They went together to the old bones of the dead wolves heaped in the corner of the pasture where they gathered fangs and claws, sharpened them and turned them into very effective weapons. That night, when the wolves came, the newly armed sheeple sprang up with their newly-acquired weapons and struck at the wolves, crying, 'Be Gone! We are not food!' They drove off the invading, hungry wolves leaving them most astonished! "When did sheeple become so bold and so dangerous?" the wolves wondered. "When did sheeple grow fangs?" It was unthinkable! The next day, flush with victory and waving their weapons, the armed sheeple approached the flock to pronounce their discovery. But as they drew nigh, the flock huddled together and cried out, 'Baaaaaaaadddd! Baaaaaddd things! You have bad things! We are afraid! You are not sheeple!' The brave sheeple stopped, amazed. 'But we are your brethren!' they cried. 'We are still sheeple, but we do not wish to be food. See, our new fangs and claws protect us and have saved us from slaughter. They do not make us into wolves, they make us equal to the wolves, and safe from being eaten!' 'Baaaaaaad!' cried the flock, 'the things are bad and will pervert you, and we fear them. You cannot bring them into the flock!' So the armed sheeple talked no more about their weapons, for they had no desire to panic the flock and wished to remain in the fold. But they resolved somehow never to return to those nights of terror, waiting for the wolves to eat them. Beaten back, time and again with weapons of their own kind, in time the wolves attacked less often and sought easier prey. They had no stomach for fighting sheeple possessing fangs and claws like theirs. Not knowing which sheeple had fangs and which did not, they came to leave sheeple out of their diet almost completely, except for the occasional raid from which more than one wolf did not return. Then came the day when, as the flock grazed beside a stream, one sheeple's weapon slipped from the folds of her fleece. A cry of alarm went out from the flock -- in terror once again, 'Baaaaaad! You still possess these evil things! We must ban you from our presence!' And so they did. The great chief sheeple and his council, encouraged by the words of their advisors, placed signs and totems at the edges of the pasture forbidding the presence of hidden weapons there. The armed sheeple protested before the council, saying, 'It is our pasture, too, and we have never harmed you! When can you say we have caused you hurt? It is the wolves, not we, who prey upon you. We are still sheeple, but we will not be food!' But the flock drowned them out with cries of 'Baaaaaaddd! We will not hear your clever words! You and your things are evil and will harm us!' Saddened by this rejection, the armed sheeple moved off. They spent their days following the flock, trying from time to time to speak with their brethren, to convince them of the wisdom of having such fangs, but met with little success. They found it hard to talk to those who, upon hearing their words, would roll back their eyes and flee, crying 'Baaaaddd! Bad Things!' The wolves kept up with the latest status of the sheeple through spies placed in and around their pastures. They decided to implement a false plan of appeasement and avoid attacks until a new and more successful strategy was developed. The Council of the Sheeple, noticing the greatly diminished incident of attacks by wolves, and having such great fear of the "baaaaad things,' decided it would better serve the peaceful purposes of the flock to require that those in possession of such 'baaaaad things' sign a list of ownership for identification purposes. This list helped the Council gain better control of who owned what whenever any of the 'baaaaaad things' got stolen or misplaced. However, many of the sheeple -- who greatly feared the wolves -- refused to sign. Consequently, they hid their "baaaad things" from the rest of the flock by burying them underground. Meanwhile, the wolves, still wounded from their prior foiled attacks, temporarily lost interest in the sheeple. They hunted and attacked easier prey elsewhere. As a result, the Council, desiring to further the resultant peace, passed a law -- disregarding the objections of many -- that all 'baaaad things' be stored in cases with locks to prevent little lambs from playing with them, and thereby, getting hurt. Consequently, those who refused to rely entirely on the shepherd and dog for their safety, insisted on their right of self-defense by maintaining the hiding of their "baaaad things" underground from the rest of the flock. That night, the wolves visited the sheeple's totems and saw their signs. They exclaimed, "Truly, these sheeple are foolish, easy prey! Brothers, let us feed!" They set upon the flock, and horrible was the carnage in the midst of the fold. The dog fought like a demon, and often seemed to be in two places at once, but even he could not avoid harm nor halt the ensuing slaughter. It was only after some of the sheeple (though wounded and bloodied in the fight) -- at the peak of the battle, when all seemed lost -- successfully retrieved their buried, locked fangs and claws, and, thus, succeeded in warding off the hungry, invading wolves, causing them to flee. However, some of the surviving sheeple reported to the Council that most unfortunately some of their brethren had been wounded, and in one instance, accidentally killed by armed sheeple in the battle. So, in the morning, when the armed sheeple spoke to the flock, and said, "See? If the wolves know you have no fangs, they will fall upon you. Why be prey? To be a sheep does not mean to be food for wolves,' the rest of the flock cried out more feebly (for their voices were fewer, though with no less terror), 'Baaaaaaaad! These things are bad! If they were banished, we would be less likely to be harmed! Baaaaaaad!' So the Council, at the urging of the remaining frightened flock, banned all fangs and claws, imposing severe penalties on anyone found in possession of same. All the while, the blood-thirsty, snarling, vicious and drooling wolves remained on the edge of the pasture secretly waiting for the next time they could attack. The ravenous wolves knew that since the sheeple were peaceloving in nature and lacking in survival prowess (being demonstrably prone to foolishness), they would be so again. This they did, and still do. In contrast, the armed sheeple -- having resolved to conceal their ever- ready, sharpened weapons from the remaining view-sensitive flock at all costs -- endured their fellow brethren's resultant fear and loathing. They even resolved to protect their brethren should ever the need arise, until the day the flock learned to understand that as long as there were hungry, ravenous wolves waiting to attack in the night, sheeple would need sharp fangs and long claws to repel them. The armed sheeple would still be sheeple, but -- unlike their wolf-eaten brethren -- they would not become food! - ---------------------- "The beauty of the Second Amendment (right to bear arms) is that it will not be needed until they try to take it." Thomas Jefferson - ---------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 17:32:56 -0600 From: Scott Bergeson Subject: Gun-control elitists hate, fear common people Gun-control elitists hate, fear common people Charley Reese May 3, 2001 http://www.orlandosentinel.com/templates/misc/printstory.jsp?slug=orl%2Dopd%2Dreese050301 - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 19:43:14 -0400 (EDT) From: charles hardy Subject: FWD: SUPPORT H.R.1762 - Second Amendment Protection Act Our delegation (or at least those who claim to be pro-gun) should probably be encouraged to co-sponsor this one... - ------Original Message------ SUPPORT H.R.1762 - Second Amendment Protection Act Rep. Ron Paul of Texas has introduced H.R.1762 "To restore the Second Amendment rights of all Americans." This proposal would: 1) Repeal the Brady Handgun Control Act and waiting periods; 2) Repeal the semi-auto assault weapon and high capacity magazine bans; and 3) eliminate the language allowing the BATF to ban guns "not suitable for sporting purposes". This bill has been referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. Contact the members of the committee to support this bill! http://capwiz.com/kba/dbq/officials/directory/directory.dbq?command=congdir Also, this bill has no cosponsors. Contact your U.S. Representative to cosponsor this bill! http://capwiz.com/kba/dbq/officials Read the text of the bill here: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:H.R.1762: Second Amendment Protection Act of 2001 (Introduced in the House) HR 1762 IH 107th CONGRESS 1st Session H. R. 1762 To restore the second amendment rights of all Americans. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES May 8, 2001 Mr. PAUL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- A BILL To restore the second amendment rights of all Americans. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the `Second Amendment Protection Act of 2001'. SEC. 2. REPEAL OF FEDERAL HARASSMENT PERIOD. Public Law 103-159 is hereby replaced, and any provisions of law amended or repealed by such Act are restored or revived as if such Act had not been enacted. SEC. 3. REPEAL OF UNCONSTITUTIONAL GUN BAN. Title XI of Public Law 103-322 is hereby repealed, and any provisions of law amended or repealed by such title are restored or revived as if such title had not been enacted. SEC. 4. REPEAL OF UNCONSTITUTIONAL DISTINCTION. (a) Section 201 of title 11 of Public Law 90-618 is amended by striking `which the Secretary finds is generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes,' and `which the owner intends to use solely for sporting purposes.' (b) Public Law 90-351, as amended, is amended as follows: (1) In section 902, strike `which the Secretary finds is generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes,' `which the owner intends to use solely for sporting, recreational, or cultural purposes,' `a projectile which the Secretary finds is primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes,' `devoted to the collection, competitive use, or other sporting use of firearms in the community,' `determined by the Secretary of the Treasury to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes and,' `(A) determined by the Secretary to be generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes, or determined by the Department of Defense to be a type of firearm normally classified as a war souvenir, and (B),' `and is generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes,' and `provided that such handguns are generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes,'. (2) Strike `lawful sporting purposes' and insert in lieu thereof `lawful purposes'. SEC. 5. EFFECTIVE DATE. The provisions of this Act shall take effect immediately upon enactment. - - - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 19:23:04 -0600 From: "Scott Bergeson" Subject: FW: BUSH'S GUN CONTROL PROPOSAL BUSH'S GUN CONTROL PROPOSAL http://www.deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,270018918,00.html? Monday, May 14, 2001 BUSH RENEWS CALL TO END GUN CRIMES Utah Gun Owners Alliance comments: If gun control has such overwhelming support in Utah, why did the Million Moms, with their huge bankroll, fawning media coverage, and national organization, only manage to get 100 people to show up for their "march"? The pro-gun side, with no funding, organization, or media support had at least as many (our reports say quite a few more), despite the fact that most Utah gun rights organizations, including UTGOA, declined to participate. As for Bush's proposal, we note that specific details are not yet available. But based on the information that is available, we consider President Bush a MUCH greater threat to gun rights than the misguided moms. And we unequivocally OPPOSE the egregiously misnamed "Project Safe Neighborhoods", which should be called "Project Gestapo". Here's why: The federal government has no business getting involved in local crime. It's a local issue, best handled by the state. Federalizing gun control means that Utah will soon be subject to the kind of tyrannical laws that have ruined California, New York, Massachusetts, Maryland and the District of Columbia. And this type of federalization can only further damage state sovereignty. And while "If you use a gun illegally, you will do hard time" sounds good, the reality is terrifying - because the target isn't violent criminals - the target is ordinary gun owners like us. There are already laws against violent crime. These laws are already enforced, in the sense that prosecutors are not declining to prosecute murderers, rapists, and other violent criminals. (We would argue for better enforcement of sentencing, but that's not the issue here.) So what's really being proposed? Enforcement of all of the stupid, unconstitutional, laws against gun owners - not criminals. In other words, we'll be spending millions of dollars to send gun owners to federal prison for possession of politically incorrect guns - guns that are too powerful, too big, too small, hold too many bullets, or look "scary" to Dianne Feinstein. We'll send people to federal prison for driving within 1000 feet of a school with a hunting rifle, or for accidentally carrying a firearm into a post office, or for committing a clerical error on a form. Note also that this proposal will do nothing about criminals who use knives, lead pipes, fists, or other weapons. The focus is on guns, not on crime. In other words, Project Gestapo says that a person who puts a flash suppressor on his rifle is more of a threat to society than a serial rapist who disfigures his victims with a razor blade. And Bush is going to measure the success of this program by counting "gun crimes". So if overall crime skyrockets, but "gun crimes" decrease, Bush will consider this a great success. We suspect the victims won't. Then there's ballistics testing - a complete waste of money, since anyone can change the ballistic fingerprint of a firearm with a nail file. The only thing ballistics testing does is increase the cost of a firearm, unless it ends up being a de facto gun ban as is the case in Maryland. "Project Safe Neighborhoods", in other words, will make our neighborhoods safe only for criminals. By disarming good citizens, it will make neighborhoods much less safe for the rest of us. "Project Safe Neighborhoods" is heavily modeled on the NRA's viciously anti-gun Project Exile. For more on this, see http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=720 Sadly, it looks like our Republican president may accomplish what liberals like the "Moms" have so far failed to do - increase gun control. Because both Republicans and the NRA will be supporting this expensive, abusive, and generally worthless program, it's going to be very difficult to stop. Please write to President Bush, Senators Hatch and Bennett, and your Congressman, and let them know you OPPOSE "Project Safe Neighborhoods" and consider it an anti-gun program. Tell them it's time to REPEAL abusive, unconstitutional gun laws - not ENFORCE them! You can write to all of these people by your zip code under "elected officials" [at] http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm Sample message: Dear _____________: I am writing to let you know that I object to "Project Safe Neighborhoods" and consider it to be a dangerously anti-gun program. Most of the thousands of gun laws on the books are unconstitutional and abusive - and do nothing to stop crime. There's no reason to send good people to do hard time in federal prison for non-violent technical "offenses". Crime is not a federal issue, either. It should be handled by local law enforcement and criminal justice systems, not by expanding a federal police state. If you're seriously interested in decreasing crime, stop letting violent criminals out of prison early - and start REPEALING all the laws that make it difficult or impossible for good people to defend their homes and families. I hope that you are not an anti-gun politician and that you will oppose "Project Safe Neighborhoods" Please write and let me know what you intend to do. Thank you. YOUR NAME YOUR ADDRESS Copyright 2001, Utah Gun Owners Alliance, Inc. and Sarah Thompson PO Box 1185 Sandy, UT 84091 801-566-1625 http://www.utgoa.org mailto:Director@utgoa.org PLEASE SUPPORT UTAH GUN OWNERS ALLIANCE! JOIN US TODAY! Did someone forward this to you? Please SUBSCRIBE NOW! That way you'll receive our FREE alerts as soon as they're released. During the legislative session, we send urgent, time limited alerts. Don't risk missing important information because someone else neglected to forward important information. Our alerts are low volume and average less than one alert per day. To subscribe to the UTGOA list, mailto:utgoa-subscribe@yahoogroups.com or use the form on our web site, http://www.utgoa.org. For more information, see http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/UTGOA. Utah Gun Owners Alliance is completely dependent on your generosity to cover our operating costs. Please consider joining us or sending a donation. Membership information is at: http://www.utgoa.org/pages/join.html Donations may be sent to: PO Box 1185, Sandy, UT 84091 Checks should be made payable to Utah Gun Owners Alliance, Inc. or UTGOA. Thank for your support! UTGOA is written and distributed by, Utah Gun Owners Alliance, Inc. http://www.utgoa.org, and Sarah Thompson, M.D. All information contained in these alerts is the responsibility of the author, unless otherwise attributed. Permission is granted for distribution of these alerts so long as no changes are made, UTGOA is clearly credited, and this message is left intact. Archives of the UTGOA alerts can be found at: http://www.utgoa.org/cgi-bin/alerts Utah Gun Owners Alliance, Inc. is a Utah non-profit corporation. - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 16:23:30 -0600 From: Scott Bergeson Subject: Gambling With your Life: Is 911 an acceptable option? Gambling With your Life: Is 911 an acceptable option? http://www.sierratimes.com/archive/files/may/16/gedan051601.htm - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 11:24:39 -0600 From: "Scott Bergeson" Subject: Dalai Lama comments on self defense "If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun." ~~ The Dalai Lama, (May 15, 2001, The Seattle Times) speaking at the "Educating Heart Summit" in Portland, Oregon, when asked by a girl how to react when a shooter takes aim at a classmate. http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis/web/vortex/display?slug=dalai15m0&date=20010515 - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 13:47:05 -0400 (EDT) From: charles hardy Subject: FWD: Dalai Lama comments on self defense This is an interesting quote... - ----forwarded message--- "If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun. Not at the head, where a fatal wound might result. But at some other body part, such as a leg." ~~ The Dalai Lama, (May 15, 2001, The Seattle Times) speaking at the "Educating Heart Summit" in Portland, Oregon, when asked by a girl how to react when a shooter takes aim at aclassmate. - - - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 14:18:14 -0400 (EDT) From: charles hardy Subject: Political motivation We often hear politicians saying that political "threats" do not influence them. (And certainly we should never say or do ANYTHING that could be perceived as a threat. Simply letting politicians know that their vote on a given bill is very important to you is generally all that should be done.) But don't believe them for one second if they try to insinuate in any way, shape, or form, that they don't care about how their votes will affect their political future. Politicians live for job security in a way that makes your typical engineer look like a fanatical risk taker. And you don't have to take my word for it. They WILL admit the truth, in round about ways, when they think it serves their purposes. Check out the quote below from today's SLTrib article on Utah playing host to the NRA convention in 2007. As an asside, I should say that--excepting their gun safety and other training material--I have serious questions as to whether the NRA and USSC do more harm or good when it comes to guns. Also, the full article contains some factual errors concerning Utah's laws on open carry. Please do not commit a crime or get yourself shot by some nervous urban cop based on a reporters misunderstanding/misreporting or Utah's laws and/or misuse of words that have different meanings in their common vs their legal usage. Full article at: . Quote of interest showing that job security is the prime motivator for politicians. Make it clear (through election results, NOT threats) that voting the wrong way on your issue will cost them their seats, and politicians will stop voting against you--either because you've replaced them with someone else, or because they don't want to be replaced. Back room deals that allow politicians to vote against you, or to not vote at all, or claim they voted for you while also telling your foes that they voted for them are not necessary and are not effective. Here's the quote taken from near the bottom of the article: ========== Former state Rep. Dave Jones blames the NRA for the defeat of his bills that would have kept guns out of churches and schools, made gun owners liable for negligent storage and required background checks at gun shows. "Republicans are intimidated by NRA membership," Jones says. "A member of the Republican leadership told me that if he had voted for one of my bills, the NRA people in his district would run another candidate against him from his own party." ==== There you have it from the donkey's mouth. A very bad bill failed NOT because of back room deals, NOT because legislators phillosophically agree with us, NOT because we are nice people and they really like us, NOT because the hate anti-gunners and wanted to get even with them. It failed because elected officials believed (accurately in this case) that to vote for that bill would make their re-election VERY difficult. This is the single most important lesson we can learn and re-learn and remember. Charles Hardy - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 14:52:44 -0400 (EDT) From: charles hardy Subject: A second lesson illustrated in NRA article There is a second important political lesson illustrated in the SLTrib story about the NRA coming to Utah. This one is "pick your battles wisely." From the article: "The Legislature jumped into the gun law fray in 1994 after Salt Lake City, West Valley City and Murray passed gun control ordinances that included waiting periods and background checks for gun buyers that went beyond federal and state requirements. Salt Lake City's ordinance was challenged, but a judge upheld the city's right to pass its own gun laws. "Rather than appeal, firearm devotees flocked to the Legislature. "In the final minutes of the 1994 legislative session, lawmakers appointed a weapons task force. The task force recommended that cities and towns be prohibited from passing ordinances stricter than state law. Lawmakers obliged the next year, wiping out tougher city gun ordinances. " Now, at the time, one may have said the pro-gun forces should have appealed the decision, that by failing to do so, they "abandoned the field to their enemies." Monday afternoon quaterbacking is easy, but I don't think it is a stretch to suggest that turning to the legislature was a better use of time and money and effort than pursuing the case via the courts. As a result of that battle choosen wisely, today we do not have to worry about what every city or county in the State might try to do with our RKBA. We have been able to concentrate efforts on the State and federal levels. Obviously, best opinions will vary as to which battles need to be fought and which can be let go. But, lacking infinate resources, it is clear that we cannot engage in every possible battle every year. Thus, we need to pick our battles wisely. Some must be waged to prevent major ills from taking effect. Others can and should be waged either bacause they can be won, or because even in losing we can gain strategic advantage (such as getting a clear vote that can then be used to expose bad politicians' ACTIONS despite their WORDS during campaign season and thus replacing them). But there will always be things that simply cannot be done with available resources. Charles Hardy - - ------------------------------ End of utah-firearms-digest V2 #211 ***********************************