ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/utah-firearms/archive/utah-firearms.199905

Internet Message Format | 1999-05-27 | 140KB

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: Victim Disarmament
Date: 03 May 1999 11:07:00 -0700


 * CARBON COPY:
 * Original was to [e-mail] (Shinaka Sykes)

Dear Shinika Sykes;

Thank you for returning my call and leaving a message on my
answering machine while I cancelled my subscription to The Salt
Lake Tribune with the Newspaper Agency Corporation on another
line.

I appreciate the fact that back in the sixties (before the
advent of the Newspaper Agency Corporation) The Salt Lake Tribune
treated its carriers far better and more fairly than did the
Deseret News, which took an oversupply for granted and expected
papers to be delivered by 5:30 pm, even when they were not delivered
to the station until 5:15, had to be stuffed, and then expected
delivery to nonsubscribers in the same number as they had paying
customers. This double-duty was imposed the first day of my service
as a substitute. I also delivered the Trib, whose dealings with
carriers in my experience was beyond reproach.

However, those are bygones. Asking us to be dog meat shows that
this integrity has entirely evaporated.

Obviously Marie Cocco's column and the attached cartoon on page
A9 of The Salt Lake Tribune on Monday May 3, 1999 is not the
first time I have read an editorial with which I disagree. However,
the Trib has long had a policy that only elitists and statist
flunkies should have access to guns. It has become increasingly
apparent that the aim is to leave others totally susceptible to
crime as well as governmentally-organized depredations and even
genocide. Your paper has hammered this stance unrelentingly since
the tragedy at Columbine HS in Littleton, Colorado, where by
tyrannical edicts all victims were left defenseless. In fact, on
Friday your paper, by printing Jack Germond and Jules Witcover's
scurrilous hit-piece, railed on Gov. Jesse Ventura for expressing
this fact. Sunday's paper had myriad anti-gun editorials and
articles, with only a lame counterpoint from Rep. Barr, who
advocates draconian enforcement of "laws" which, in my opinion,
ought not exist in the first place, in opposition. Where are the
editorials from L. Neil Smith, Vin Suprynowicz, or Neal Knox?

The cartoon attached to Ms. Cocco's column is exceedingly disingenuous.
Your only proposal is to "GET RID OF THE GUNS". The problem in these
school shootings is that the guns of those shot at and their supposed
protectors had already been gotten rid of. Should you repent of
your oppressive and murderous position please inform me so I may
reinstate my subscription to The Salt Lake Tribune.

Scott Bergeson
[e-mail]



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From:
Subject: Re: Another poll - needs help.  Vote early & often (fwd) (fwd)
Date: 04 May 1999 15:10:57 -0400


Looks like you can vote more than once

Chad

---------- Forwarded Message ----------

On May 4, C. D. Tavares wrote:

[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows
--------------------]

>I watched the numbers roll up in 10's on this one.  Appears 3 people
>from HCI are wearing out their mouses on it.
>
>http://www.bouldernews.com/cgi-bin/pollvault/pv_vote.cgi
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>The Right to Self Defense is a Fundamental Human Right - RKBA
>----------------------------------------------------------------

Didn't get me there.  Try:

http://www.bouldernews.com/news/statewest/421shoot1.shtml

and vote from the "Reaction" column on the right-hand side.

We are really losing this one -- 12%-88% against CO CCW.
--

[e-mail]      http://home.earthlink.net/~cdtavares

[------------------------- end of forwarded message
------------------------]

--
            *****       Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel!        *****
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no
weapon in every | by COLT; |         --   Max Plank   | weapon sell his
hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a
on every side!  | 1911-A1. | word.   --   The Bible   | sword.--Jesus Christ
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------

-


---------- End Forwarded Message ----------



Pengar Enterprises, Inc. and Shire.Net LLC
Web and Macintosh Consulting -- full service web hosting
Chad Leigh
[e-mail]            [e-mail]


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From:
Subject: Clinton don't approve of Milosevic's methods (fwd) (fwd)
Date: 04 May 1999 15:17:40 -0400


Some people want to know about this.  I am out of state now and so thought
I'd pass this one.

Chad

---------- Forwarded Message ----------

Do you know anyone down in Salt Lake City?  We can't afford to let this sort
of thing happen unremarked, anywhere, but we can't just jump salty over
nothing either.


On May 4, [e-mail] wrote:

[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows
--------------------]

Subj:  Fwd: Salt Lake City - SWAT Teams attack park patrons
Youth & Family Services; Held Hostage by Darlene Stewart. 201- 868-6237)

>From: <[e-mail]>
>Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 16:06:54 EDT
>Subject: Fwd: Salt Lake City - SWAT Teams attack park patrons
>To: [e-mail]
>
>
>Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
>Received: from  rly-zd01.mx.aol.com (rly-zd01.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.225])
>  by air-zd05.mail.aol.com (v59.4) with SMTP; Mon, 03 May 1999 14:48:40
>  -0400
>Received: from harrier.prod.itd.earthlink.net
(harrier.prod.itd.earthlink.net >  [207.217.120.12])
>    by rly-zd01.mx.aol.com (8.8.8/8.8.5/AOL-4.0.0)
>    with ESMTP id OAA17758;
>    Mon, 3 May 1999 14:48:33 -0400 (EDT)
>Received: from chuckm (1Cust60.tnt7.phoenix.az.da.uu.net [63.14.199.60])
>  by harrier.prod.itd.earthlink.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA17885;
>  Mon, 3 May 1999 11:47:20 -0700 (PDT)
>Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
>Comments: Authenticated sender is <[e-mail]>
>From: "Solutions International" <[e-mail]>
>To: [e-mail]
>Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 11:46:41 +0000
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
>Subject: Salt Lake City - SWAT Teams attack park patrons
>Priority: normal
>X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.41)
>
>Dear Friends,
>
>A few days ago, I receive this rather disturbing e-mail forwarded
>from a friend.  It sounded so outlandish that I didn't feel
>comfortable forwarding it at that point.  However, I have now
>confirmed this information is indeed true and is something to which
>we should all pay close attention.  This is an example of how
>pseudo-Martial Law was implemented for all the wrong reasons in the
>wrong place at the wrong time.  Will we stand by and let more of this
>abuse happen in other parts of the country?
>
>Please read and take whatever action you deem appropriate.
>
>Peace and Prosperity,
>
>Jeff
>
>
>
>------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
>Date:          Fri, 30 Apr 1999 06:57:07 -0700 (PDT)
>From:          "L.D. Parable" <[e-mail]>
>To:            Jeffrey Howard <[e-mail]>
>
>Jeff,
>
>Please pass this along to your group:
>
>Date: 29 Apr 1999 18:44:46 GMT>Newsgroups: alt.society.civil-liberties
>>To: [e-mail]>Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
>>References: <01be914a$38d45700$e83384ce@kfvtjuml>>From:
>[e-mail] (ItsMoi)
>>Subject: MARSHALL LAW PROVEN IN UTAH SOS
>>X-UIDL: 52ec387f2720c939c6c3935b4b99a4c9>
>> My name is Claudia K. White. I am a 35 yo female, with a
>Bachelorsdegree of
>>science. I live in SLC, Utah.  One week ago sunday  Cheif of
>policeOrtega,
>>sent a swat teamm into Liberty park.  The religious and the rest ofthe
>>community go to the park every sunday.  Which consists of
>mostlyfamilies,
>>Vetrans, indians, young teens and small children. ( This is our
>1stamendment
>>right).>  The Swat team proceed to sweep the park as if it was Penn
>State or
>Ten..>Square.  The Swat team was fully armed in riot gear and weapons.
>People where>bulgened with billy clubs. Ticketed and force out of the
>park.
>>   I personall y was attacked hit 6 times and was hit by a billy
>clubwhich
>>factured my fibula on my left leg.  My library book " The
>USConstitution and
>>Case Summaries"  was torn from my hands and ripped apart.
>>  We where marched out of the park by the Swat team.  At no time
>didwe resist
>>arrest orshow any violence towards the officers.
>>  We left the boundaries of the park as ordered to do.  At which
>timewe got
>>permission from the property owner ( approx 1300 so. & 600 East)
>tostay on his
>>property.  He too goes to the drum circle.
>>   At this time cheif of Police Ortega arrived at the scene.
>Ipersonally
>>tried to reason with him to no avail.  Police Cheif Ortega would
>noteven speak
>>with us,  me or anyother Adult at the scene; for by this time
>thecrowd had
>>dispersed and only a handful of mostly under age kids where present.
>>  Cheif Ortega  ordered his troops to began a military type attack
>onthe crowd
>>of teens and the few adults left.  The officers, approximately 20
>withfull
>>riot gear, had fully loaded semi automatic weapons pointed
>executionstyle at
>>our backs as they marched us off the private property and up the
>cityowned
>>street,( 4 city blocks) protecting themselves with bullet
>proofsheilds.  The
>>Swat team forced us across the street to another park and left
>thescene.
>>   At no time did the Police return and tell any of us we could
>reenter the
>>park to gather our belongings, our vehicles, or did they tend to
>theinjured.
>> . 16 citations were issued for alcohol and small amounts of
>maujuana.None for
>>weapons.  The city as of this time has not taken any action
>agianstOrtega the
>>officers or Mayor Deedee Corridini, Nor offered any type of
>publicapology.
>>   The Mayor, Cheif of police and the Governer hold equal liability
>inthis
>>incidence.  For the evening before was Earthday at the Liberty Park.
>>  At the Earth Jam festival Mayor Deedee Corridini sent
>arepresentative to
>>speak on her and the IOC plans of building a apatheater in the park.
>This
>>would entail digging up a old burial ground and A historic home
>ofIsaac Chase
>>and Brigham Young, built in the early 1800's.
>>  I personally have contacted the ACLU and NPR radio.  The News mediais
>>rufusing to run this as a National emergency.
>>  The Attorney General of Utah< Jan Graham, has no Civil authority
>inthe State
>>of Utah. As Governer Mike Leavitt and the house of represntatives
>ofUtah voted
>>and stripped her of these rights.
>>  This proves the well known theory that the United States of
>Americais no
>>longer and hasn't been for quite sometime, governed by
>theConstitution of the
>>United States of America, nor Virginia Bill of Rights. Otherwise
>putthe United
>>States at least for the early 60's has been under Marshall Law.
>APolice
>>state, as was Vietnam.
>>   I believe I speak for all Americans when isay we are not
>AntiPolice,  We
>>are  Anti Police State.  We are willing to give to Ceasar what
>isCeasar's.
>>But after that the federal government is requied to acts
>asMagistrates, just
>>and the Bill of rights directs them to do " Serve the People".....
>Inother
>>worlds they are to be Noble and act as our waiters, (ie. servants,civil
>>servants).>  Please contact your Local and federal government on this
>matter.
>And please>contact the Media.  As I have tried with no avail in Salt
>Lake City
>Utah.  Be>reassured I have contacted everyone in my State and the ACLU.
>>   We all must speak out on this matter or the proverbial they
>willcontinue
>>running, destroying, and robbing us of  our " inalienable,
>infeasible"rights
>>of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness".
>>  I would also like to note on behalf of Utah State that Senator
>OrinHatch,
>>Mayor Deedee Corridini, and Cheif of Police Ortega, are not even
>fromthe State
>>of Utah. The aforementioned, Governer Mike Leavitt, President
>Clintonand VP Al
>>Gore. are refusing to face this as a matter of Nation Importance
>andState of
>>Emergency.  This I hold to be of gross Maladministeration
>
>SOLUTIONS INTERNATIONAL
>Maximizing Personal Potential
>http://www.1999.com/solutions
>
>"No man is free until he learns to do his own thinking
>and gains the courage to act on his own personal initiative."
>- Napoleon Hill
>
A PUBLIC DEFENDER IS A "JUDAS GOAT"
FIND AND POST THE LINCOLN PRIVATE PAPERS
  NON-CONSTITUTIONAL, AND UN-CONSTITUTIONAL ARE NOT THE SAME THING
  To receive posts from this list send an E-MAIL to me with the word
"subscribe" in the subject box.
  To be removed from this list send a post to me with the word "unsubscribe"
  in the subject box.

[------------------------- end of forwarded message
------------------------]

--
            *****       Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel!        *****
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------
An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no
weapon in every | by COLT; |         --   Max Plank   | weapon sell his
hand = Freedom  |   DIAL   | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a
on every side!  | 1911-A1. | word.   --   The Bible   | sword.--Jesus Christ
----------------+----------+--------------------------+---------------------

-


---------- End Forwarded Message ----------



Pengar Enterprises, Inc. and Shire.Net LLC
Web and Macintosh Consulting -- full service web hosting
Chad Leigh
[e-mail]            [e-mail]


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Off topic but opportunity for community service
Date: 04 May 1999 18:25:14 -0600

The American Red Cross relies pretty heavily upon blood draws at various
college campuses to meet their blood needs.  With BYU, UofU, and USU now
either out, or close to being out, on summer break it is becomming
difficult for the Red Cross to meet their blood needs.

So, if you are healthy,  and have not donated in the last 8 weeks, please
consider stopping in at their donation center and donating blood.  They
are located on 900 East 6616 South (just north of I-215) and are open for
walk in donations Monday and Friday 7am - Noon and Wednesday 2pm - 7pm.
No apt needed.

They will ask for, but do not require, a social security number.  I
always decline to give my SS number out and they have no problem with
that and happily take my blood.

They do require some form of picture ID--and are fairly used to seeing
CCW permits used for that purpose.  :)

Also, my wife tells me that when they draw blood from police officers who
are armed, they will require the officer to unload and/or place his
holstered sidearm under the cot or otherwise out of reach.  Apparantly,
on the very rare occassion that a police officer blacks out while giving
blood, they have a habit of immediatly reaching for their sidearm as they
come to and before they are fully cognizant.  Obviously, if you CCW
properly, they won't know if you are armed.  However, I would think
proper safety would dictate that if you are not VERY sure will not black
out and subsequently reach for your gun while giving blood, you should
make sure it is far enough beyond your reach while donating that you are
sure to be fully cognizant before being able to get to it.

charles.
==================================================================
Charles C. Hardy
<[e-mail]>

___________________________________________________________________
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]

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: DesNews poll needs your vote
Date: 05 May 1999 12:43:04 -0600

This week's Deseret News Poll at <http:www.desnews.com> (middle right
hand side of page) asks,

"Question: Do you think Utah Gov. Mike Leavitt should convene a special
session of the Legislature in response to recent incidents of
    gun violence, providing a forum for lawmakers to deal with
weapons-related issues?"

Current results are encouraging:

Yes


                               141 votes (33%)
              No



                               279 votes (65%)
              Other / Unsure


                               11 votes (3%)

Let's make sure they are overwhelming!

==================================================================
Charles C. Hardy
<[e-mail]>

___________________________________________________________________
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]

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Letter to Editors needed
Date: 05 May 1999 12:52:47 -0600

This editorial from today's DesNews is too good to pass up.  Every paper
in the State needs to receive multiple letters to the editor and full
length opinion pieces pointing out the fact that Vermont is the only
State in the Union to fully respect the people's right to an effective
armed defense.  They have LESS gun control than any other State in the
Union.  No permits needed to carry a weapon.  No gun free zones, not even
the State Capital.  Please, write a letter.

Best kinds of acts to copycat

              Deseret News editorial

                    By last count, Vermont was the only state in the
union in which a teenager had neither attempted nor threatened to attempt
a massacre similar to the one two weeks ago
              at Columbine High in Littleton, Colo. Utah is no exception.
                    Officials at Salt Lake, Granite and Jordan school
districts have fielded bomb threats almost daily. Students at Central
Davis Junior High turned in a suspicious classmate.
              Police then found gunpowder and pipes at his house, and a
pipe bomb at another house.
                    Perhaps most frightening of all, police in Duchesne
County arrested two teenage boys who had begun wearing the black trench
coats of the Columbine killers and had
              threatened to blow up the school prom. They found live
ammunition and spent shells in the boys' lockers, but no bombs. Both boys
said they were only joking.
                    Evil acts do indeed influence others. For some
reason, despite the horrors of such a crime, some people want to at least
threaten to duplicate it. However, we suspect the
              opposite also is true. Acts of goodness, of heroism, of
nobility, courage and bravery, also influence others.
                    News, by its nature, is represented by abnormal or
unusual behavior. That's why the negative after-effects of Columbine
receive so much attention. But a little perspective
              is in order. Americans may think their nation is unraveling
like a frayed cloth. That's not true. Columbine High provided ample
evidence that society is filled with goodness,
              and that it is particularly evident among the rising
generation.
                    First, consider Cassie Bernall. She was the one
willing to die for her faith when the gunmen asked her if she believed in
God. As Time Magazine noted, she surely must
              have known what the safe answer was. Instead, she faced her
tormentors and said, "There is a God, and you need to follow along God's
path." For this, she was killed.
                    Consider other acts that day. One young man lay atop
his sister and a friend, sacrificing his own body to shield theirs.
Another boy overcame the pain of bullet wounds in
              his own leg and managed to move an explosive away from
others.
                    These were reflex actions. None of these young people
spent the day analyzing how they would react under such circumstances.
They acted spontaneously based on their
              own core values and morals.
                    What bravery! What courage! What nobility! And, yes,
what wonderful examples to follow.
                    Acts of goodness don't often qualify as news. They
don't as much attention as the less frequent acts of evil. Yet they
abound everywhere, and when they are exhibited as
              grandly as they were under the terrible circumstances at
Columbine, they ought to find their way into the hearts of all. They
ought to inspire copycats everywhere.


==================================================================
Charles C. Hardy
<[e-mail]>

___________________________________________________________________
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]

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: LTE needs reponse
Date: 07 May 1999 10:53:32 -0600

've already got a LTE in the queue, so will somebody PLEASE respond to
this moron.  Maybe pulling Hitler's quote about joining the military if
you want to shoot would be good one.  The recent court decision out of
texas clearly articulating the history and context of the 2nd amnd and
the resulting decision that it does protect an individual right might not
be bad either.

From today's desnews LTE.


Read the U.S. Constitution

                    In the aftermath of all of the shootings here in Salt
Lake City and in Colorado, I was hoping that some of our leaders would
come to their senses. If one of them
              would go back to really read the Constitution along with a
history lesson in the atrocities that the British Empire was perpetrating
against the Colonies. These are
              the reasons for the Bill of Rights and securing the safety
of each state in the Union. Our own U.S. history is the part that we have
all forgotten.
                    The Second Amendment was written to guarantee each
new state the right to form a state militia, not to facilitate the
individual ownership of guns as the "Right
              to die by my own hand" (spelled NRA) groups would have you
believe.
                    The Second Amendment was written because the British
attempted to confiscate all weapons for their own army. Last time I
checked, we have been free from
              enemies on our sovereign soil since the War of 1812.
                    I do agree that we have too many laws and not enough
prosecution. I have a simple but effective remedy: two laws replacing
everything already on the books.
                    1. No handguns and no military assault rifles or
rapid fire weapons authorized within the boundaries of the United States.
Possession or use of one of these
              weapons will result in automatic imprisonment for 20 years.
                    2. Hunting rifles are allowed and a required license
process for proof of appropriate training and eligibility to own one. No
convicted felons are allowed to own a
              hunting rifle.
                    If someone has a burning desire to use a handgun or
an assault rifle might I recommend joining local Army National Guard or
Army Reserve units ù we could
              use more recruits. This is the only intent of the Second
Amendment, not the proliferation of murder devices.
                    I lived in Europe for over nine years serving in the
armed forces, and I never felt ill at ease as I do in the United States
when traveling at night. Weapons were
              strictly controlled, even with difficult-to-maintain
borders. Our society has deteriorated down to a bunch of out of control
gunslingers and common sense be
              damned.
                    I am still waiting for a literate leader to come
forth and provide some sense to a gut shot public.

              Curtis A. Wood
              West Jordan

==================================================================
Charles C. Hardy
<[e-mail]>

___________________________________________________________________
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]

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "David Sagers" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fwd: "What goes around, comes around"
Date: 07 May 1999 16:31:58 -0600

Received: from wvc
    ([204.246.130.34])
    by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Fri, 07 May 1999 13:36:20 -0600
Received: from kendaco.telebyte.com by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
    id NAA26945; Fri, 7 May 1999 13:18:06 -0600
Received: (from petidomo@localhost)
    by kendaco.telebyte.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA10241;
    Fri, 7 May 1999 12:29:14 -0700
Received: from gull.prod.itd.earthlink.net (gull.prod.itd.earthlink.net [207.217.120.85])
    by kendaco.telebyte.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA10237
    for <[e-mail]>; Fri, 7 May 1999 12:29:12 -0700
Received: from oemcomputer (sdn-ar-001fltampP264.dialsprint.net [168.191.74.26])
    by gull.prod.itd.earthlink.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA15551;
    Fri, 7 May 1999 12:27:01 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <004d01be98bf$92a33ea0$1a4abfa8@oemcomputer>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: list
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=_E7B1EEE2.7A1B7523"

--=_E7B1EEE2.7A1B7523
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

I read in a Rocky Mountain Post article this morning that the mother of =
the geezer who provided the TEC-9 to the Columbine shooters was an avid =
member of Handgun Control, Inc.
When asked about the incident, she said (OWTTE), "I can't understand it. =
He was never around guns at home".

As the Eddie Eagle award-winning gun safety program promotes, (Extract)

    "Talk to your child about guns. Discuss their uses and history. By =
removing the mystery surrounding guns, your child will be far less curious =
about guns, and more likely to follow safety rules.

    Make sure your child understands the difference between a toy gun and =
a real gun, and the difference between "pretend" and real life. Explain to =
your young children that guns on television are not real, and are shown =
being used incorrectly.

    If you allow your child to play with toy guns, use them to teach safe =
gun handling" (I believe we know what the basic rules are: safe pointing, =
trigger-finger off until ready, keep unloaded until ready for use).

Probably wishes now she had met "Eddie Eagle".


Chuck Hoskinson
"US Army, Retired
... and still serving proudly"


--=_E7B1EEE2.7A1B7523
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Part.001"

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#b8b8b8>
<DIV><FONT size=2>I read in a Rocky Mountain Post article this morning that the
mother of the geezer who provided the TEC-9 to the Columbine shooters was an
avid member of Handgun Control, Inc.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>When asked about the incident, she said (OWTTE), "I can't
understand it. He was never around guns at home".</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>As the Eddie Eagle award-winning gun safety program promotes,
(Extract)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>    "Talk to your child about guns. Discuss
their uses and history. By removing the mystery surrounding guns, your child
will be far less curious about guns, and more likely to follow safety
rules.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>    Make sure your child understands the
difference between a toy gun and a real gun, and the difference between
"pretend" and real life. Explain to your young children that guns on television
are not real, and are shown being used incorrectly.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>    If you allow your child to play
with toy guns, use them to teach safe gun handling" (I believe we know what
the basic rules are: safe pointing, trigger-finger off until ready, keep
unloaded until ready for use).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Probably wishes now she had met "Eddie Eagle".</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Chuck Hoskinson<BR>"US Army, Retired<BR>... and still serving
proudly"</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

--=_E7B1EEE2.7A1B7523--

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: Re: Columbine Propaganda
Date: 08 May 1999 14:55:00 -0700


---------- Forwarded excerpt ----------

COMMUNIQUE #2129
-----------------

Janet "RHINO" Reno has come out with her own PROPAGANDA in the wake
of the COLUMBINE MASSACRE, she has teamed up with MTV and DOJ will be
distributing PROPAGANDA PACKAGES to schools throughout Amerika, get
yours, or one for a friend via a pay-phone toll free 1-877-284-1188.

TO RECEIVE email from ralph: send email to [e-mail] and in
the Subject make sure your email address and the word GO-RALPH (no spaces)
is in the subject.



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "David Sagers" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fwd: SWAT Team Misfire? by James Bovard
Date: 11 May 1999 17:30:17 -0600

Received: from wvc
    ([204.246.130.34])
    by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Tue, 11 May 1999 10:37:02 -0600
Received: from fs1.mainstream.net by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
    id KAA00876; Tue, 11 May 1999 10:18:40 -0600
Received: from  (localhost [127.0.0.1])
    by fs1.mainstream.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA24888;
    Tue, 11 May 1999 12:27:29 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <v04011702b35e047ce3d7@[198.4.94.210]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Originator: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: first-class
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline



Washington Times, May 11, 1999
Commentary Section  p. 17


                      SWAT Team Misfire?

                         by James Bovard

     Federal and Colorado  officials are seeking to transform the
April 20 disaster at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado
into a law enforcement triumph. Attorney General Janet Reno praised
the local police response as "extraordinary" - "a textbook" example
of "how to do it the right way." President Clinton declared
Saturday that "we look with admiration at the... the police
officers who rushed to the scene to save lives."

      However, the excruciatingly slow response by SWAT teams and
other lawmen to the killings in progress turned a multiple homicide
into a historic massacre. The pathetic excuses being offered
vivify how law enforcement has no legal liability to people they
fail to protect.  The Colorado killings offer stark evidence why
citizens cannot rely on government for their personal safety.

     "Close enough for government work" is the motto for the
defenders of the law enforcement response.  Jefferson County deputy
Neil Gardner, the first policeman to shoot and miss at the killers,
said on NBC's Dateline: "I think with exchanging fire, it did allow
some--some people that are--that were fleeing the scene to get out
of the building. I always will have to live with the fact that,
maybe if I could have dropped him, maybe it would have saved one or
two more lives." However, at the time of this gunfire exchange, the
teens had apparently only killed two people.  If Gardner had hit
one of the teens, it might have unnerved his co-killer and led to
a surrender - or an earlier suicide - and thus saved as many as 11
lives.  Two other policemen arrived on the scene, fired at one of
the killers - and missed.

     Jefferson County Sheriff John Stone later explained: "We had
initial people there right away, but we couldn't get in. We were
way  outgunned." This wasn't Beider-Meinhoff: this wasn't Abu
Nidal's terrorist cliche: this was two relatively inexperienced
teens with a few cheap firearms.  If policemen on the scene
actually felt outgunned, they could have quickly retrieved
automatic weapons or other heavy-duty firearms from patrol cars.

     Many local SWAT teams descended on the high school parking lot
and vicinity after the shooting started. But none of the SWAT teams
confronted the killers.  Police spokesmen said the SWATs were not
sent in "for fear that they might set off a new gunfight," as the
New York Times reported.  At least there was no danger of a
"gunfight" when Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold were executing
unarmed students.

     Sheriff Stone justified the non-response: "We didn't want to
have one SWAT team shooting another SWAT team." It seemingly never
occurred to police not to send in all the SWAT teams.  Apparently,
the more police who respond to a crisis, the more incapable any
policeman becomes of doing anything to stop the killings.

     The police response also seemed paralyzed by concerns for
"officer safety."  Steve Davis,  spokesman for the Jefferson County
Sheriff's Department, said, "We had no idea who was a victim and
who was a suspect. And a dead police officer would not be able to
help anyone."  But the "suspects" were brazenly walking around
with sawed off shotguns and firing at will and were identified in
the first few minutes as wearing trenchcoats.

      Donn Kraemer of the Lakewood SWAT team explained:  "If we
went in and tried to take them and got shot, we would be part of
the  problem. We're supposed to bring   order to chaos, not add to
the chaos." Some police seem to see their role as historians -
entering the building after the crime spree is over and carefully
noting where each dead body lay. Is it necessary to have SWAT teams
with the most advanced equipment and machine guns in order to
distribute body bags after the carnage is over?

     Law enforcement spokesmen are now bragging that they
successfully contained the two teens in the school after the
killing rampage started.  Sheriff Stone proclaimed last Saturday
that "early intervention" by the cops who shot at the killers and
missed "saved one heck of a lot of kids' lives, by pinning these
guys down [Harris and Klebold spent most of their time in the
library, where they killed 10 people], by putting them on the
defensive, instead of the offensive [except for the 13 murder
victims], and subsequently probably led to their suicide."  Yet,
one of the youths left a suicide note before the carnage began.

     SWAT teams may have become an impediment to public safety.
There were probably plenty of individual policemen with the courage
to enter the building and go after the shooters while the killings
continued. But the militarization of law enforcement seems to have
also resulted in police becoming bureaucratized - if not
Dilbertized.

     President Clinton, Attorney General Reno, and others are
claiming that the Colorado tragedy proves the need for stricter gun
control. The Washington Post used the tragedy to call for the
confiscation of all handguns.  But the more successful gun control
is in disarming citizens, the more dependent people become on
government officials for  protection - protection that is often
slow and unreliable.

     When government ineptitude results in unnecessary killings -
well, the survivors can write a letter to their congressman or
state legislator. A federal appeals court declared in 1982, "There
is  no constitutional right to be protected by the state against
being murdered by criminals or madmen."  Citizens have no
effective, enforceable right to police protection - and both police
and criminals know this.

     Is there anyone who has closely followed this tragedy who
would trust the lives of their children to the Colorado SWAT teams?
The police can be trusted to protect themselves. But what about the
rest of us?

TAGLINE: Bovard is the author of Freedom in Chains: The Rise of the
State & the Demise of the Citizen (St. Martin's Press, 1999).

[to see first chapter of Freedom in Chains: http://www.jamesbovard.com ]

**************************************************************************
Subscribe to Freematt's Alerts: Pro-Individual Rights Issues
Send a blank message to: [e-mail] with the words subscribe FA
on the subject line. List is private and moderated (7-30 messages per =
week)
Matthew Gaylor,1933 E. Dublin-Granville Rd.,#176, Columbus, OH  43229
Archived at http://www.egroups.com/list/fa/
**************************************************************************


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Another DesNews poll of interest to gun owners
Date: 12 May 1999 12:50:04 -0600

There is another Deseret News Poll that may be of interest to some.  It
is located middle of the page, right hand side at
<http://www.desnews.com> 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
<[e-mail]>

___________________________________________________________________
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]

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "S. Thompson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: URGENT -- Need Guns Save Lives Storries
Date: 12 May 1999 19:58:38 -0600

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  [e-mail] , 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!


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fw: ALERT! Time Magazine Gun Poll!
Date: 13 May 1999 10:44:18 -0600


==================================================================
Charles C. Hardy
<[e-mail]>

--------- 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
<[e-mail]>


___________________________________________________________________
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]

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "S. Thompson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fw: Time Magazine Gun Poll
Date: 13 May 1999 12:18:29 -0600


>>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
>>
>
>



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Des News gun poll needs your vote
Date: 13 May 1999 13:58:42 -0600


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
<http://www.desnews.com>.  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
<[e-mail]>

___________________________________________________________________
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]

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: Re: FW: GUN ALERT: URGENT!!! URGENT!!! URGENT!!!
Date: 13 May 1999 14:01:00 -0700


---------- Forwarded message ----------

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: [phone] / FAX: [phone]
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
[e-mail] 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.



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: Re: Gun Laws Can Be Dangerous, Too
Date: 13 May 1999 14:48:00 -0700


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.


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "larry larsen" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Another DesNews poll of interest to gun owners
Date: 14 May 1999 05:34:51 -0600

On this poll, as usual None of the Above.

-----Original Message-----


>There is another Deseret News Poll that may be of interest to some.  It
>is located middle of the page, right hand side at
><http://www.desnews.com> 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
><[e-mail]>
>
>___________________________________________________________________
>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]
>
>-
>
>



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: Re: FW: UT: Sen. Hatch Actively Pushing Gun Control
Date: 15 May 1999 16:05:00 -0700


---------- Forwarded message ----------

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
[e-mail]

************************************ GOA posting ********************

Date sent: Fri, 14 May 1999 17:13:22 -0400

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: [phone] / FAX: [phone]
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: [phone]; fax:
202-224-6331; e-mail: [e-mail]]. 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
[e-mail] 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.




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "S. Thompson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: ALERT! Interim May 19th Agendas
Date: 16 May 1999 22:11:57 -0600

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:
    [e-mail]
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:
[e-mail]

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "S. Thompson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Copycats
Date: 16 May 1999 22:44:20 -0600

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.
<contact info>

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: DesNews Poll needs anti gun control votes
Date: 17 May 1999 13:24:27 -0600

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
<[e-mail]>

___________________________________________________________________
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]

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "S. Thompson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: ALERT! Call Borin' Orrin & Others Now!
Date: 17 May 1999 16:06:57 -0600

>Delivered-To: [e-mail]
>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 4.5 (0410)
>Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 12:12:20 -0600
>Subject: Re: Hatch Calls
>From: "Jim Dexter" <[e-mail]>
>To: "Mr. Black" <[e-mail]>
>
>I just got a phonecall from a member who said he just called Sen. Hatch's
>SLC office (524-4380) to protest Hatch's support of more gun control. He
>said the person he talked to claimed that calls were running 90% in favor of
>Orrin's recent flipflop.
>
>It looks like the forces of darkness and evil have organized. Strike back!
>Call Hatch and Bennett and Cook and Cannon and Hansen ASAP and let them know
>we don't need no more steenkin' gun laws.
>
>


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: FW: Alert: Hatch Claims 90% Support
Date: 17 May 1999 13:27:00 -0700


---------- Forwarded message ----------

I just got a phonecall from a nonmember who said he just called Sen. Hatch's
SLC office (524-4380) to protest Hatch's support of more gun control. He
said the person he talked to claimed that calls were running 90% in favor of
Orrin's recent flipflop.

It looks like the forces of darkness and evil have organized. Strike back!
Call Hatch and Bennett and Cook and Cannon and Hansen ASAP and let them know
we don't need no more steenkin' gun laws.



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "David Sagers" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Another sleazy executive order
Date: 18 May 1999 12:53:07 -0600

Another sleazy executive order=20

Congressman Tom Campbell, R-Calif., recently received a wealth of mixed =
praise for compelling Congress to actually do their job under the War =
Powers Act. If only he, or any other congresscritter faithful to their =
oath, would compel a vote for the elimination of the unconstitutional, =
routinely abused legislation by executive order, it might actually save =
the Republic.=20

Our erstwhile commander in grief has again reportedly executed another =
insidious and unconstitutional decree. This latest executive order =
apparently bans all imports of all foreign made weapons, guns, parts, and =
ammunition. This royal fiat was reportedly signed before the U.S. Senate =
folded like a house of rice paper cards, and whimpered for a "do over." =
This latest insidious "excrement" order is supposed to become effective =
officially and publicly in mid June.=20

The impeached, in-contempt-of-court, lying sociopath in the oval office =
has again answered the questions his smarmy Arkansas buddy and defender of =
the indefensible, Sen. Dale Bumpers, asked the Senate during the impeachmen=
t trial: "Why put him out of office now? He has so little time left. How =
much damage could he do in the time he has left?" HELL-O?=20
        =B7    How about starting World War III?=20
=B7    How about trashing the Constitution and Bill of Rights?=20
=B7    How about giving the communist Red Chinese the neutron bomb and =
exposing the entire West Coast of the United States naked to a real =
nuclear threat?=20
=B7    How about neutering and diluting the U.S. military?=20

"How much damage could he do in the time he has left?" Bumpers asked. =
Given the year is not yet half over, I shudder to think "how much damage =
he could do in the time he has left."=20

Allegedly, the short time President has had the U.S. Customs, the Secret =
Service, and other agencies turn around ships that had any imported =
weapons on board to deny them entering our ports. And, this supposedly has =
been going on for the past two months. BEFORE this latest executive order, =
and BEFORE the Senate elected to personify the definition of hypocrisy: =
"the act or practice of pretending to be what one is not, or to have =
principles or beliefs that one does not have." You damn betcha!=20

Last week the anti-gun Democrats were foaming at the mouth on their =
vitriolic offensive. The supposed "majority" Republicans tucked tail and =
gave up significant Second Amendment ground as soon as critics said mean =
things. Scores of weak-kneed Republicans crossed party lines to support =
gun control proposals on two separate occasions. Then on a third vote, =
several Republicans crossed over to give anti-gun Senators "Upchuck" =
Schumer and "Chicom" DiFi a victory in their efforts to ban the importation=
 of high-capacity magazines. The words "shall not be infringed" were =
replaced with "shall not be tolerated."=20

So, let me get this straight:=20
        =B7    Congress votes to reject the gun-grabbers' =
unconstitutional overreaching.=20
=B7    Clinton executes an executive order, which supposedly will not be =
officially admitted to for another month.=20
=B7    Congress has a myopic epiphany and begs for and gets a sandlot =
"do-over."=20
=B7    Congress affirms the unlawful premature execution of an excrement =
order they are not supposed to know of yet.=20

American poet Longfellow once observed, "We judge ourselves by what we =
feel capable of doing; others judge us by what we have done." What HAS =
Congress done?=20

Young Adult Gun Ban. This ban, which passed 96-2, could severely punish =
parents who allowed their kids to even touch a so-called semi-automatic =
"assault weapon." This amendment includes certain exemptions -- kinda, but =
there are imponderable questions which NO senator could answer. However, =
although the creators of this law can't explain it, a parent would be =
required to do what the creators could not in order to avoid going to =
jail.=20

Just what the hell is a "semiautomatic assault weapon"? MY definition has =
always been ANY weapon pointed at me.=20

However, the congressional definition/obfuscation -- plus exemptions -- =
takes up six pages of fine type in the U.S. Code.=20

Congress says a child can handle a banned semi-auto if he is in the =
"immediate and supervisory presence" of a parent, or if he possess a =
written permission slip from the parent. Seems "reasonable." However, a =
parent can receive 20 years in jail IF during a target practice session, =
the parent walks to the car to retrieve more ammunition and the juvenile =
is no longer in the parent's "immediate" presence and he does not have a =
permission slip?=20

Republicans preemptively rolled over, covered their two faces and =
surrendered to Chuck Schumer. But they weren't alone in their perfidy. =
Sure Republican Sen. John Ashcroft introduced the young adult gun ban, and =
four other Republicans (Hatch , Craig , McCain and Gordon Smith) sponsored =
the amendment requiring background checks at gun shows.=20

According to the Associated Press, "Craig, a member of the National Rifle =
Association board of directors, said the organization had 'grudgingly' =
agreed" to the gun show amendment. AGAIN, the NRA leadership refuses to =
lead, refuses to follow, and refuses to get out of the way.=20

On a voice vote, the Senate voted to ban the importation of magazines =
holding more than 10 rounds. (Remember, previously -- just one day earlier =
-- the Senate defeated a motion to kill the amendment by a vote of =
59-39.)=20

Anti-gun senators claimed these magazines were impractical for "hunting." =
Excuse ME, but the Second Amendment doesn't have anything to do with =
anyone's ability to HUNT. The Second Amendment was/is intended to provide =
"the people" with the tools necessary to oppose tyranny.=20
Thomas Jefferson noted, "When governments fear the people there is =
liberty. When people fear the government there is tyranny."=20

Confucius said, "An oppressive government is much worse than a man-eating =
tiger."=20

Republicans who sold out need to hear from you. You should express YOUR =
views and opinions of what they have done -- and what they have not done. =
Remind them of what John F. Kennedy said: "If we make peaceful revolution =
impossible, we make violent revolution inevitable." If they are not =
concerned about the here-and-now, try reminding them what Dante wrote =
in=20

The Inferno, "The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in a =
time of moral crisis, maintain their neutrality."=20

If Dante was right, the Devil must be clearing a hot zone for Republican =
cowards and NRA collaborators.=20


Geoff Metcalf is a talk-show host for KSFO in San Francisco.=20


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "David Sagers" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fwd: The Day the NRA Died?
Date: 18 May 1999 13:21:49 -0600

Received: from wvc
    ([204.246.130.34])
    by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Tue, 18 May 1999 12:01:21 -0600
Received: from fs1.mainstream.net by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
    id LAA09644; Tue, 18 May 1999 11:42:44 -0600
Received: from  (localhost [127.0.0.1])
    by fs1.mainstream.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id NAA12546;
    Tue, 18 May 1999 13:46:20 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Originator: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: first-class
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

L.A. Times
Editorial=20
May 18, 1999

[Edited for brevity]=20

"Stand Up, Be Counted on Guns=20

"Today could be freedom day for U.S. senators who=20
know that responsible gun control is a sane, effective=20
way to combat violence but have refused to support=20
such controls for fear of the gun lobby. This day offers=20
them freedom from the tyranny of the NRA and its=20
dwindling ability to exact electoral revenge on its foes.=20
If they have a little courage, these senators can finally=20
throw off their fealty to the NRA and vote the wish of=20
most Americans for passage of several gun control=20
proposals. .... the Littleton ... massacre has forever altered=20
the dynamics of the gun control debate.  No longer can the=20
gun lobby claim the moral ground of constitutional principle.=20
The sea change began last Wednesday .... The Senate is=20
scheduled to vote today on several gun control amendments=20
to the juvenile justice bill. Democrats are demanding another=20
chance to clamp down appropriately on gun show sales,=20
and to approve a requirement that every handgun sold=20
have a child-proof safety lock. Republican moderates=20
and others can declare their freedom at last from the gun lobby.=20
All they need do is vote yes."


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "S. Thompson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fwd: Rule: Re[2]: Say No to More Gun Control
Date: 18 May 1999 16:11:31 -0600

Yeah, right!

>Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 18:06:46 -0700
>From: [e-mail] (Frank Lautenberg)
>Subject: Rule: Re[2]: Say No to More Gun Control
>To: [e-mail] (Sarah Thompson)
>
>     Thank you for contacting me about gun control.
>
>            I know that there are millions of law abiding gun owners in the
>     United States who legally possess firearms for legitimate purposes.
>     The right to own firearms is guaranteed by the Constitution, and as
>     with all constitutional rights, this right must be protected.  At the
>     same time, Congress has a responsibility, acting within the
>     Constitution, to ensure that innocent people are not unreasonably put
>     at risk by firearms.  For that reason, I have supported measures to
>     keep guns from felons, drug dealers and others who would use them to
>     inflict harm.
>
>            Restricting the use of lethal weapons is not a cure-all
>     solution to the problem of crime.  Clearly we have to get tougher on
>     criminals, and we need to beef up our law enforcement system with more
>     police, more prosecutors, and more prisons.  You have my assurance
>     that I will do all I can to fight crime, and as the Senate continues
>     to consider related legislation, I will keep your views in mind.
>
>            Again, thanks for contacting me.
>
>
>                                                Sincerely,
>
>                                                Frank R. Lautenberg
>                                                United States Senator


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "David Sagers" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fwd: Fw: TO BILL - THANKS FOR THE MEMORIES (fwd)
Date: 18 May 1999 18:43:22 -0600

Received: from wvc
    ([204.246.130.34])
    by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Tue, 18 May 1999 13:38:18 -0600
Received: from fs1.mainstream.net by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
    id NAA09858; Tue, 18 May 1999 13:19:41 -0600
Received: from  (localhost [127.0.0.1])
    by fs1.mainstream.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id PAA19319;
    Tue, 18 May 1999 15:29:11 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Originator: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: first-class
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On May 18, Rae Starr wrote:

[-------------------- text of forwarded message follows -------------------=
-]

Received a copy of the following, no date, no way to check authenticity.
But the argument probably stands on its own.

>Subject: TO BILL - THANKS FOR THE MEMORIES
>
>As I was making my daily journey to the Post Office the other day,
>I patiently waited for a car to vacate a parking space near the door.
>As the rear of the vehicle came toward me, I noticed a bumper sticker,
>which read, in big, bold letters, "THANK ME.  I VOTED CLINTON-GORE."
>
>Pondering the message of the brave, stubborn soul in the car ahead of
>me, I considered all the things I could be thankful for as a result of
>the Clinton-Gore regime.  Indeed, I discovered the list was long and
>varied.
>
>Thank you for reminding us that the government that gave us the Internal
>Revenue Service and welfare also lusts for control of the greatest
>healthcare system in the world.
>
>Thank you for reminding that the FBI, who has a file on millions
>of Americans, including myself, can give those files to people powerful
>enough to demand them.
>
>Thank you for giving us a President who supports partial-birth abortions.
>
>Thank you for introducing us to Jennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, Monica
>Lewinsky and about two dozen other names that we might not have met and
>known otherwise.
>
>Thank you for allowing a WAR HERO and the author of one of the most
>successful military campaigns in history to leave the presidency
>because, no matter how successful he was, in all our moral outrage, we
>just wouldn't tolerate someone who would lie to the American people by
>promising "no new taxes" and then going back on his word. We certainly
>can't have a liar in the White House, now can we?
>
>Thank you for giving us a President who discusses his choice of
>underwear with teenagers.  We always wondered if presidents wore boxers
>or briefs.
>
>Thank you for installing a man who reminds us of those good old days of
>pot smoking (without inhaling, of course) and war PROTESTING.
>
>Thank you for showing us that the ridiculous plot of the movie, "Wag the
>Dog," could really be plausible after all.
>
>Thank you for showing all the men and women in America that sexual
>harassment in the workplace, and on the job, is okay as long as it
>involves powerful middle-age executives and young women half their age
>under their power. It is, after all, a "private matter."
>
>Thank you for revealing that the agenda of the National Organization of
>Women only includes some women.  Women like Anita Hill and not women
>like Paula Jones, Monica Lewinsky, et al.
>
>Thank you for reintroducing the concept of "impeachment" to a new
>generation that missed the discussion surrounding it the last time it
>was brought up.
>
>Thank you for curing me of my addiction to the evening news.
>
>Thank you for reminding us that, when all is said and done,
>"CHARACTER" really, really DOES matter.
>
>And, in comparison to recent days:
>
>Thank you for making Dan Quayle look like a Rhodes Scholar.
>Thank you for making Jimmy Carter look competent.
>Thank you for making Gerald Ford look graceful.
>Thank you for making Richard Nixon look honest.
>Thank you for making Lyndon Johnson look truthful.
>Thank you for making John Kennedy look moral.
>Thank you for making Al Gore look positively presidential.
>Thank you for reminding us of the importance of term limits.
>
>And really, thank you not once, but twice!  Why, if not for YOU, instead
>of the current, interesting discussion all over the television networks
>and newspapers, we would be focused on a whole slew of trivial matters
>such as global defense, the economy, nukes in North Korea, genocide in
>Africa, the containment of terrorism, and all those other boring topics.
>
>So, thank you, thank you, thank you!  Oh, and if you voted for Ross
>Perot, thank you, too.  You deserve just as much of the credit as my
>friend with the bumper sticker.
>
>Since Bill Clinton took office, here are some of the "GOOD" things that
>have happened:
>
>*72 House and Senate witnesses have plead the fifth.
>*17 witnesses have fled the country to avoid testifying.
>*19 foreign witnesses have refused to be interviewed by
>    US investigative bodies.
>*19 prosecutions from Whitewater investigations.
>*14 convictions from Whitewater investigations.
>*8 imprisonments from Whitewater investigations.
>*55 total charges in all Clinton scandals.
>*32 total convictions (so far) in all Clinton scandals.
>*14 total imprisonment's (so far) in all Clinton scandals.
>*938 overnight stays at the White House for Clinton donors.
>*$40 million-cost of Clinton's trip to China.
>*62 House of Representative seats that have changed
>    from Democrat to Republican.
>*12 Senate seats that have changed from Democrat to Republican.
>*13 Governorships that have changed from Democrat to Republican
>*1,200 state legislative seats that have changed
>       from Democrat to Republican
>*353 elected Democrats who have switched parties
>     since Clinton took office.
>
>Yes, it's been an interesting six years for "the most ethical
>administration in the history of the Republic." But then ...
>everybody knows it's ALL the fault of the "Vast right-wing conspiracy."
>Go figure...!
>
>(By an Episcopalian Minister in Georgia)

[------------------------- end of forwarded message -----------------------=
-]

--
-
           *****       Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel!        *****
----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------=
-
An _EFFECTIVE_  | Insured  | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no
weapon in every | by COLT; |         --   Max Plank   | weapon sell his
hand =3D Freedom  |   DIAL   | In the beginning was the | garment and buy =
a
on every side!  | 1911-A1. | word.   --   The Bible   | sword.--Jesus =
Christ
----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------=
-


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: FW: FYI. My Response to the Gun OPINIONS of a Couple LDS Leaders.
Date: 18 May 1999 18:24:00 -0700


---------- Forwarded message ----------

From an LDS member in response to the article on the Church's position on guns.

----------

To All:

There are some elected officials who will buy -- hook, line, and sinker --
any random OPINION that comes from some one (or a couple) LDS leaders.  We
have to be prepared to respond to these OPINIONS (they are not official
policy no matter how bad the UEA wants it to be).  I believe this can be
most effectively done by minimizing the significance of these OPINIONS,
putting them into the proper perspective of being in the minority.  Here is
how I have formulated my response:

MY RESPONSE TO M. RUSSELL BALLARD'S AND ALEXANDER MORRISON'S REMARKS (see
www.sltrib.com/05161999/utah/105969.htm):  "Oh, it was just their opinions;
they're entitled to them.  The Church leadership are probably just giving
the minority in the church a fair chance to air their views -- just like
they did regarding the Democrat party news interview.  After all, who wants
to stifle the minority in the Church just because they believe differently?

"I'm sure that for every one leader with those views, there are many more
that believe differently.  But official Church policy is supported by the
unanimous approval of the First Presidency and Council of the Twelve -- the
scripturally-constituted governing body of the Church.  As you recall, the
Church declined to endorse, or even consider, the latest resolution backed
by several other churches in Utah that called for stricter gun laws.  They
have also not taken an official position on guns other than that the
Constitution and Bill of Rights are divine documents and that it is a law
in heaven that a man has every right to defend himself and his family from
all forms of danger and tyranny.

"This included Joseph Smith, the head of this dispensation, who carried a
very concealed, pepperbox pistol into prison (very much against the law)
and used it to defend himself and his friends against the murderous mob (he
fired 6 quick shots and wounded three men as they rushed up the stairs in
Carthage to kill him).  His timely actions slowed the mob and likely saved
Wilford Woodruff and Willard Richards from also being murdered.  Thank God
Joseph was able to have access to that pistol or our third President might
never have been."


HINCKLEY'S APRIL 19 REMARKS (quoted by SL Tribune at
www.sltrib.com/05161999/utah/105969.htm):
"It becomes apparent to all that a way must be found to keep the mentally
ill from senseless acts of violence," Hinckley said. "You cannot have an
indiscriminate allowance of firearms without abuses."

MY RESPONSE:  "Hey, I completely agree with President Hinckley.  You can't
have _totally_ indiscriminate allowance of firearms without abuses.  If
someone with serious, violent mental illness gets out of a psychiatric
facility or prison too soon, and they get unlimited access to firearms,
there could be real trouble."

Mr. Black

P.S. Exerpts from Pres. Gordon B. Hinckley's interview with Larry King
(portions accentuated):

Larry King:
This is politics aside then?

President Gordon B. Hinckley:
Politics aside. The Church does not become involved in politics. We don't
favor any candidate. We don't permit our buildings to be used for political
purposes. We don't favor any party.

Larry King:
But you do speak out or will speak out more on moral issues?

President Gordon B. Hinckley:
We speak very strongly on moral issues. Gambling, liquor, what have you.
Yes.

Larry King:
Against them all. Right?

President Gordon B. Hinckley:
That's right.

Larry King:
How about guns?

President Gordon B. Hinckley:
GUNS, WE HAVEN'T DONE MUCH WITH. I don't have one.

Larry King:
Neither do I. But are you thinking about maybe speaking out more on that?

President Gordon B. Hinckley:
I DON'T THINK WE'VE GIVEN ANY CONSIDERATION THAT I REMEMBER.



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "S. Thompson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fwd: ALERT!  Socialist, anti-gun lies
Date: 19 May 1999 02:09:12 -0600


>This is sickening!  I don't hear any complaints about campaign donations
>from trial lawyers who want to sue gun manufacturers.  I don't hear any
>complaints about campaign contributions in exchange for military secrets.
>I think we need a response -
>
>WANT NUKES OUT OF THE HANDS OF THE CHINESE?
>GET FOREIGN MONEY OUT OF OUR POLITICS!
>
>Send YOUR comments to: [e-mail]
>
>Moll
>
>"WANT GUNS OUT OF OUR SCHOOLS? GET GUN MONEY OUT OF OUR POLITICS"
>Public Campaign Launches Ad Targeting Members of Congress
>
>WASHINGTON -- Calling attention to the much overlooked but obvious influence
>of campaign contributions from the gun lobby over the gun control debate in
>Washington, Public Campaign took out a full-page ad in Roll Call today. The
>ad, which will also run in The New York Times within the next two weeks,
>identifies some of the lawmakers who benefited most from gun money on Capitol
>Hill, and headlines with "Want guns out of our schools? [We need to] get gun
>money out of our politics." All of these members have taken stands opposing
>gun safety laws.
>
>"All the soul searching following the horrible tragedy at Columbine has
>missed one of the essential elements of the problem -- easy access to guns,"
>said the executive director of Public Campaign, Ellen Miller. "Of course no
>one condones this sort of senseless violence, but it is no coincidence that
>those who benefit most from gun money are the ones talking the least about
>curtailing the access our children have to guns."
>
>The ad prominently features pictures of the top ten beneficiaries of gun
>lobby expenditures on Capitol Hill and the amount the gun lobby spent on
>their behalf. They include: Sen. Jim Bunning (R-KY), $197,175; Sen. Fred
>Thompson (R-TN), $192,704; Sen. Bill Frist (R-TN), $186,619; Sen. James
>Inhofe (R-OK), $176,607; Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA), $105,187; Rep. Paul Ryan
>(R-WI), $88,429; Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R-AZ), $80,808; Rep. Steve Chabot
>(R-OH), $74,233; Rep. Rick Hill (R-MT), $72,393; and, Rep. Merrill Cook
>(R-UT), $65,737.
>
>The gun lobby has spent a total of $15.5 million funding federal candidates
>and parties, and in independent expenditures, since 1991. And while the clear
>majority of Americans -- even a majority of gun owners -- wants stricter gun
>laws, elected representatives on Capitol Hill ignore the will of the people,
>failing time after time to pass stronger gun laws.
>
>"The NRA and the gun industry get what they want from Congress because of the
>millions of dollars they give to candidates or spend on their behalf," added
>Miller. "Until we get special interest money out of our politics, we will not
>get sane gun laws in this country."
>
>Public Campaign is a national non-partisan, non-profit organization working
>on comprehensive campaign finance reform. The ad can be found on our Web site
>at www.publicampaign.org/guns.html.
>
>
># # #
>



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "David Sagers" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Dept Of Treasury:  Sporting Use Study
Date: 19 May 1999 13:56:39 -0600

http://www.atf.treas.gov/pub/assault_rifles/index.htm


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "David Sagers" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fwd: Hastert
Date: 20 May 1999 13:26:30 -0600

Received: from wvc
    ([204.246.130.34])
    by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Thu, 20 May 1999 09:41:54 -0600
Received: from kendaco.telebyte.com by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
    id JAA12734; Thu, 20 May 1999 09:23:16 -0600
Received: (from petidomo@localhost)
    by kendaco.telebyte.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id IAA20453;
    Thu, 20 May 1999 08:36:22 -0700
Received: from imo26.mx.aol.com (imo26.mx.aol.com [198.81.17.70])
    by kendaco.telebyte.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA20447
    for <[e-mail]>; Thu, 20 May 1999 08:36:20 -0700
Received: from [e-mail] (3703)
    by imo26.mx.aol.com (IMOv20) id wOSYa01450
     for <[e-mail]>; Thu, 20 May 1999 11:33:22 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: list
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=_97C1E9ED.2B4A2408"

--=_97C1E9ED.2B4A2408
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

Well, this was forwarded to me by another serious shooter.  I am baffled =
by=20
the political strategy, or total lack ofit, by the republicans.  Better =
to=20
take the heat for standing for something than to look stupid and weak =
by=20
giving in on basic principles.

Scott Harmon

--=_97C1E9ED.2B4A2408
Content-Type: message/rfc822

Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from  rly-zd04.mx.aol.com (rly-zd04.mail.aol.c
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "David Sagers" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fwd: Re: L&J: Claire Wolfe - Read It
Date: 20 May 1999 15:12:44 -0600

At 10:51 AM -0700 5/20/99, Patricia Neill wrote:
>http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_cwolfe/19990520_xccwo_before_the.shtm=
l=20
>
>   WorldNetDaily
>
>  THURSDAY
> MAY 20
>1999
>
>FreeLife Claire Wolfe
>----------
> WND Exclusive Commentary
>----------
>  Before they come for the guns
>  =A9 1999 Claire Wolfe
>
>"... Romanian term limits,"  somebody was saying as I walked into =
Grouchy's
>Gun Shop, just north of the Hardyville stoplight.
>
>The other guys around the counter laughed, as if at a bitter joke. Then
>their grins -- and their talk -- chopped off as they turned to see who'd
>come in. "She's OK," said the glance they exchanged. I went to look at
>holsters and they went on as if they'd never been interrupted.
>
>"Didja hear about this new executive order? That murdering dictator in =
the
>White House ..." one groused as I disappeared around a display rack. And =
it
>occurred to me -- not for the first time -- that this is why politicians
>and bureaucrats are so desperate to crush gun dealers and gun shows out =
of
>existence.

snip



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From:
Subject: Democrats for the 2nd Amendment anti gun control petition (fwd)
Date: 20 May 1999 21:09:33 -0400



---------- Forwarded Message ----------

You all may have heard that MOVEON.ORG is sponsoring a petition
asking Congress to assume their duties and adopt gun control
measures.  Well, Democrats for the 2nd Amendment has just
launched a site OPPOSING those gun controls.

Please drop by our site and sign:

Go to:  http://www.d2a.org

At the top left of the page is a link to the petition.

PLEASE sign and let the denizens of DC know what a horrible
mistake they're making by attacking our rights.

Best regards,

   Don Baldwin

---------- End Forwarded Message ----------



Pengar Enterprises, Inc. and Shire.Net LLC
Web and Macintosh Consulting -- full service web hosting
Chad Leigh
[e-mail]            [e-mail]


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From:
Subject: more Democrats for the 2nd Amendment anti gun control petition (fwd)
Date: 20 May 1999 21:16:12 -0400



---------- Forwarded Message ----------

Oh yeah:  after you sign it, tell a few friends about it and
ask them to sign.  And then please join them in printing it
out and distributing some copies to gun stores and gun shows.

---------- End Forwarded Message ----------



Pengar Enterprises, Inc. and Shire.Net LLC
Web and Macintosh Consulting -- full service web hosting
Chad Leigh
[e-mail]            [e-mail]


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From:
Subject: One last note (sorry) about D2A petition (fwd)
Date: 20 May 1999 21:17:55 -0400



---------- Forwarded Message ----------

This petition is completely non-partisan in nature, its
sole intent being to help preserve our rights.

---------- End Forwarded Message ----------



Pengar Enterprises, Inc. and Shire.Net LLC
Web and Macintosh Consulting -- full service web hosting
Chad Leigh
[e-mail]            [e-mail]


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "David Sagers" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fwd: Time reset their poll -- Vote again (fwd)
Date: 21 May 1999 11:18:02 -0600

Received: from wvc
    ([204.246.130.34])
    by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Fri, 21 May 1999 06:04:48 -0600
Received: from legacy.lgcy.com by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
    id FAA14008; Fri, 21 May 1999 05:46:02 -0600
Received: from [204.228.145.250] by legacy.derail.org (NTList 3.03.0018) id ja898101; Fri, 21 May 1999 05:57:11 -0600
Received: from [166.70.9.161] (helo=chadbag)
    by hobbiton.shire.net with smtp (Exim 2.04 #4)
    id 10knvE-0005jT-00
    for [e-mail]; Fri, 21 May 1999 05:57:05 -0600
Resent-from: "Allen Leigh" <[e-mail]>
Resent-to: [e-mail]
Resent-date: Fri, 21 May 1999 05:57:20 -0600
Received: from [134.111.41.96] (helo=aleigh.cac.stratus.com)
    by hobbiton.shire.net with esmtp (Exim 2.04 #4)
    id 10knOm-0005gY-00; Fri, 21 May 1999 05:23:33 -0600
        [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail],
        [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Originator-Info: login-id=chad-pc; server=hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: Mulberry (Win32) [1.4.2.1, s/n U-301202]
Resent-Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
X-ListMember: [e-mail] [[e-mail]]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline



---------- Forwarded Message ----------

>Just got information that the original Time Magazine gun poll concerning
gun >ownership, their participant count was over 200,000.  The vote was
>OVERWHELMINGLY pro-gun, and in our favor.  Apparently Time didn't like =
the
>results, so they reset the counters and are running the poll again.  The
>counter is now at about 106,000.  Let's jump on them again.
>
> The address for the poll is
>
>http://www.pathfinder.com/time/polls/gunpoll.html


I was just there -- yep they reset it.

Pass this on to every pro-RKBA list.

--
     Johann Opitz
<[e-mail]>

---------- End Forwarded Message ----------



Pengar Enterprises, Inc. and Shire.Net LLC
Web and Macintosh Consulting -- full service web hosting
Chad Leigh=09
[e-mail]            [e-mail]




-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Scary study
Date: 21 May 1999 13:34:49 -0600

Check out the president's and military's power to disarm you.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_exnews/19990521_xex_clinton_and_.sht
ml
==================================================================
Charles C. Hardy
<[e-mail]>

___________________________________________________________________
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]

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "S. Thompson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fwd: Totally outlaw guns
Date: 21 May 1999 18:59:48 -0600

I'd suggest that we start a letter-writing campaign to Sen. Hatch.  Feel
free to distribute this.

>Senator Orrin Hatch
>[e-mail]
>
>Dear Senator Hatch:
>
>Congratulations on the passage of S. 254.  However, I would respectfully
>suggest that this bill doesn't go far enough towards addressing the current
>controversy over civilian-owned firearms. In fact, it confuses the issue
>with unnecessary arguments over who should be allowed to own firearms and
>what types of firearms should be allowed.
>
>We both know that the real goal of such legislation is to completely disarm
>all American civilians.  Why else would the bill be so complex that
>absolutely no one knows anymore what is legal and what isn't?  Therefore, I
>suggest that you take a true leadership role and introduce new legislation
>that is simple and straightforward.
>
>Such a bill would repeal the Second Amendment and ban the possession of any
>firearm and any ammunition by civilians, i.e those not currently members of
>law enforcement agencies or the military.  Make any offense punishable by
>death.
>
>Such a law would make everyone happy.  No doubt your good friends and
>colleagues, Senators Schumer, Feinstein and Lautenberg would be ecstatic,
>as would be President Clinton.  And if any of your fellow Congresspeople
>still believe in the Constitution, they would have the opportunity to stand
>up for what they believe.
>
>The polls all show that Americans want more gun control.  The federal
>government has already successfully usurped all state laws.  The people
>have overwhelmingly accepted complete federal control of all aspects of
>their lives.  We're already slaves, and slaves don't need guns.
>
>A true statesman could settle this matter once and for all.  Who knows -
>you might even be elected President!
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Sarah Thompson, M.D.


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: Denver Rocky Mountain News Poll on Firearms
Date: 24 May 1999 09:15:00 -0700


---------- Forwarded message ----------
<[e-mail]>

http://resistance.to
http://thePentagon.com/FullBookJacket
http://GunsSaveLives.com

I hope you had an opportunity to read Carla Crowder's column in
today's Denver Rocky Mountain News (available on-line at:
http://InsideDenver.com/shooting/0520gun0.shtml). This poll
shows that people's attitude about firearms and gun control have
not changed much since the terrorist attack on Columbine High
School. The poll shows that 65% of those surveyed still favor
shall issue concealed carry (down from 66% prior to the attack).
Also, 75% of those polled said they believed gun ownership was a
basic American right UP from 70% prior to Columbine.

I think these figures show us that the media distortions have not
swayed thinking citizens who realize that no number of laws would
have stopped a suicide terrorist attack. These figures also show
that legislators shouldn't fear a voter backlash by standing up
for law abiding citizens and the right to keep and bear arms.

Thank you for your support in the last session and I hope that we
will be able to complete the work began then.

-- Bernie Herpin Colorado Springs, CO http://www.whit.org/herpin
******************
Why do liberals trust the bad guys to be good and expect the law-
abiding to be bad?

******************
Firearms, self-defense, and other information, with LINKS are
available at: http://shell.rmi.net/~davisda
Latest additions are found in the group NEW with alerts under
the heading ALERTS. Previous E-mail message are being archived.
********************

--------------------------
GUNSSAVELIVES(TM) IS A PRIVATE, UNMODERATED LIST GOVERNED BY AN ACCEPTABLE
USE POLICY AVAILABLE FROM [e-mail]. SUBSCRIPTION CONSTITUTES
CONSENT TO RECEIVE SOME EMAIL THAT IS UNSOLICITED. THE OWNER TAKES NO
RESPONSIBILTY FOR CONTENT. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. TO SUBSCRIBE, SEND EMAIL
TO [e-mail] WITH "SUBSCRIBE GSL" IN THE MESSAGE.



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Great pro-gun article in WSJ
Date: 25 May 1999 13:22:59 -0600

The Friday, May 21st edition of the Wall Street Journal contains an oped
piece (page A12 lower right corner) by Massad Ayoob entitled, "Arm
Teachers to Stop School Shootings."  It is a great read and should
probably be shared with legislators.  For any who have access to the WSJ,
I reccommend it.  If anyone has e access and can post an e-version of the
article, that would be great.  Or, if anyone has a scanner and OCR
software they want to try on this, I can fax or mail a copy to you.
Finally, as a last resort, I may try to get my scanner/OCR up and running
or even just type it in by hand.  But it will be the weekend at the
earliest before I get to it.

charles

==================================================================
Charles C. Hardy
<[e-mail]>

___________________________________________________________________
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]

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fw: Re:Great pro-gun article in WSJ
Date: 25 May 1999 17:08:43 -0600

Text of the previously mentioned article follows:

==================================================================
Charles C. Hardy
<[e-mail]>

--------- Forwarded message ----------
As Chas requested, here 'tis

> The Friday, May 21st edition of the Wall Street Journal contains an
oped piece
> (page A12 lower right corner) by Massad Ayoob entitled, "Arm Teachers
to Stop
> School Shootings."  It is a great read and should probably be shared
with
> legislators.  For any who have access to the WSJ, I reccommend it.  If
anyone
> has e access and can post an e-version of the article, that would be
great.
> Or, if anyone has a scanner and OCR software they want to try on this,
I can
> fax or mail a copy to you. Finally, as a last resort, I may try to get
my
> scanner/OCR up and running or even just type it in by hand.  But it
will be
> the weekend at the earliest before I get to it.




Commentary

Arm Teachers To Stop Shootings

By Massad Ayoob,
director of the Lethal Force Institute in Concord, N.H.,
which trains police officers and military personnel in self-defense
techniques.

The echoes had barely faded from the gunfire at Columbine High School in
Littleton, Colo., before the gun-control lobby began shouting for more
restrictive laws, a chorus that is sure to grow in the wake of
yesterday's
shooting in Conyers, Ga., in which six students were wounded.

This week the Senate responded, approving a measure that would require
handguns to be sold with child-safety devices as well as mandatory
background checks for gun sales at gun shows and pawn shops. What will
these
bills do to prevent a mass murder like the one in Colorado? Not much. But
one of the few immediate steps that could stop killers in the school yard
is
deemed beyond the pale. I'm referring to arming schoolteachers.

To many people, that suggestion sounds absurd; gentle molders of young
minds
should not carry lethal weapons. Yet there is good precedent for the
idea.
In Israel armed teachers are common, and terrorist attacks at schools
nonexistent. Indeed, it was only during a 1997 visit by Israeli
schoolgirls
to the "Island of Peace" along the Jordanian border, in which the
teachers
had been asked to leave their weapons behind, that an Arab gunman took
advantage of an easy opportunity to open fire, killing seven children and
wounding another six.

Similar precedents exist in the U.S. In 1997, 16-year-old Luke Woodham
entered Pearl High School in Pearl, Miss., armed with his estranged
father's
hunting rifle and dozens of cartridges. When Woodham opened fire, vice
principal Joel Myrick sprinted to the parking lot, grabbed a Colt .45
automatic pistol from his truck and forced the gunman to surrender by
pointing the gun at his head. This limited the casualties to two students
killed and seven wounded. In 1998, Andrew Wurst, 14, opened fire on an
eighth-grade graduation dance in Edinboro, Pa. The owner of the banquet
hall
where the dance was being held grabbed a shotgun from his office and
quickly
confronted Wurst, who dropped his gun. The toll was thus limited to one
slain teacher and two wounded students.

The Columbine massacre brought to eight the number of highly publicized
"school shootings" in recent years. Of these, two were brought to an end
by
responsible adults who had access to weapons of their own. Another
two--in
Jonesboro, Ark., and Bethel, Alaska--ended with no further bloodshed
after
armed police arrived and confronted the killers at gunpoint. Three more
incidents concluded when the perpetrators were forcibly confronted by
brave
individuals acting without the benefit of a gun. Finally, it should be
noted
that the Columbine killers turned their guns on themselves almost as soon
as
they realized a SWAT team was in the building and closing in on them.

Those who are aghast at the thought of arming school personnel say that
the
presence of an armed school officer made no difference in the Littleton
tragedy. They are wrong. The officer, a Jefferson County deputy sheriff,
engaged the gunmen very early in the shooting. Firing at a distance of
some
70 yards (almost three times the range at which police qualify with their
pistols), and armed only with a 9mm handgun, the officer was nonetheless
able to keep the better-armed killers at bay long enough to reduce the
death
toll significantly.

It is true, however, that if the school officer had not been initially
alone
the assailants may well have been more effectively confronted. If, for
example, Dave Sanders, the brave teacher who was killed trying to save
his
students, had been armed and trained. he might have been able to put an
end
to the violence and save his own life in the bargain.

To be sure, arming school personnel does not by itself guarantee an end
to
school violence; any long-term solutions must embrace a variety of
measures,
and not just pat answers such as banning violent movies, videogames or
guns.
But in the near term, trained and responsible adults armed with concealed
weapons and likely to be in a position to interdict potential gunmen are
in
fact a viable solution.

This is not as drastic a measure as it may seem. No school has its own
fire-fighting battalion on the grounds, but all adult employees of the
school know how to operate fire extinguishers and supervise an orderly
fire
drill. A school nurse is generally on hand, but virtually all teachers
and
school administrators have learned basic first aid and CPR. It is but a
small step from here to train school personnel in the use of firearms,
and
to arm at least some of them.

For the concept to work, armed teachers would have to be volunteers who
pass
strict psychological testing, and go through at least as much training in
firearms and the judicious use of deadly force as current laws demand of
armed security guards. The weapons would have to be discreetly concealed,
and which personnel are armed should be revealed only on a need-to-know
basis.

Yes, professional educators carrying lethal weapons is probably
unthinkable
to some. But previously unthinkable dangers can sometimes only be
neutralized by previously unthinkable defenses.



___________________________________________________________________
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]

-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "S. Thompson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: The TIME gun poll returns!
Date: 27 May 1999 17:17:35 -0600

I've lost track of how many times Time has reset its gun poll hoping to get
results the gun-grabbers like better.

They've done it yet again, but now it's down to two questions.

Vote again at:
http://cgi.pathfinder.com/time/daily/poll/archive/



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "David Sagers" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fwd: Saving flags, burning rights
Date: 28 May 1999 09:35:41 -0600

Received: from wvc
    ([204.246.130.34])
    by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Fri, 28 May 1999 09:28:36 -0600
Received: from ci.west-valley.ut.us by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
    id JAA23760; Fri, 28 May 1999 09:09:39 -0600
Received: from WVCDomain-Message_Server by ci.west-valley.ut.us
    with Novell_GroupWise; Fri, 28 May 1999 09:28:34 -0600
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.2
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

Saving flags, burning rights=20


By James Bovard
=A9 1999 WorldNetDaily.com=20

Congress is launching a new campaign to save America from burnt flags. =
Both the House and Senate Judiciary Committees are charging forward with a =
constitutional amendment to allow flag burners to be punished -- as if =
this is the most important legislation Congress could consider.=20
Yet, at the same time it wraps itself in the flag, Congress continues =
criminally negligent in defending the Bill of Rights. Federal, state, and =
local law enforcement are confiscating property from citizens without any =
evidence of wrongdoing, without a trial, and without the slightest concern =
for due process.=20
Nowadays, a person has a right to his property, unless and until some =
government employee makes an accusation against him; then the government =
can take the title. Federal seizures of private property have skyrocketed =
in the last two decades. Federal agents have gone overboard: a September =
1992 Justice Department newsletter noted, "Like children in a candy shop, =
the law enforcement community chose all manner and method of seizing and =
forfeiting property, gorging ourselves in an effort which soon came to =
resemble one designed to raise revenues." Just last year the Justice =
Department confiscated 42,454 cars, boats, houses, stacks of cash, and =
other items of private property -- booty valued at $604,514,733.=20
Hearsay evidence is all that is required: A mere rumor or scrap of gossip =
can justify government seizure of a person's most valuable belongings. =
Last December, the Drug Enforcement Agency confiscated $19,000 from a =
professional basketball player who was stopped and searched while driving =
in Ohio; a drug-sniffing dog alerted to the money a state highway patrol =
officer found in the car. (The DEA was brought in because state law did =
not allow the highway patrol to directly confiscate the money; forfeiture =
routinely involves collusion between multiple law enforcement agencies to =
evade restrictions on their power). However, studies have shown that up to =
70 percent of all currency is tainted with some type of drug residue. But =
such taints are sufficient pretext for government agents to seize the =
wallets of anyone carrying more than a few hundred dollars.=20
Victims of government confiscation have scant hope of justice. A Washington=
, D.C., policeman arrested Carolyn Mefford in 1993 and seized $3,709 from =
the Kentucky woman who was carrying a protest sign in a Washington park. =
After Mefford was released from a mental hospital three months later, she =
sought to get her money back. But the policeman who arrested her stole the =
money from a police storage area and, after the theft became known, =
committed suicide. Lawyers for D.C. government successfully argued in =
small claims court that the city owes Mefford nothing, since stealing was =
not part of the lawman's job description.=20
Asset forfeiture abuses have been a national scandal for almost a decade. =
A federal appeals court complained in 1992, "We continue to be enormously =
troubled by the government's increasing and virtually unchecked use of the =
civil forfeiture statutes and the disregard for due process that is buried =
in those statutes." Yet, because many congressmen fear taking any action =
that might offend law enforcement agencies -- the primary profiteers of =
the abuses -- the outrages continue.=20
Unfortunately, the Supreme Court has done little to curb these abuses. The =
Court decreed in January that innocent owners have no right to information =
on how to recover cash or other property wrongfully seized by government =
agents. Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for a unanimous court, declared =
that "the Constitution does not demand that the owners be given help on =
retrieving their money or property." Justice Kennedy stressed that the =
police had "lawfully seized" the cash at issue from a California couple =
during the search of their home. (The homeowners were not accused of =
violating any law and had no criminal records.) But all this means is that =
the cops saw the money, they took it, and since they were law enforcement, =
the seizure was automatically lawful. According to the Supreme Court, a =
list of what is confiscated is all that the victim is entitled to.=20
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court ruled that police officers do not =
even need to get a warrant from a judge before confiscating a car =
suspected of having been used to deliver narcotics. In the case of Florida =
vs. Tyvessel White, Bay County, police were allowed to confiscate White's =
car more than two months after the alleged crime had been committed -- =
even though the police made no effort to charge him with that crime. It =
would be difficult to craft a better license-to-steal for law enforcement.=
=20
Forfeiture is increasingly corrupting law enforcement. The Justice =
Department announced in 1996 that local and state law enforcement agencies =
would be permitted to use money they received from forfeiture funds to pay =
police salaries. The decision was harshly criticized by some law enforcemen=
t officials who believe it would spur "bounty hunting" forfeitures -- =
policemen devoting their time to seizing private property rather than =
protecting private citizens. Scandals have occurred across the country =
after discoveries that seized money was pocketed by cops.=20
House Judiciary chairman Henry Hyde is sponsoring a bill to trim some of =
the worst abuses of forfeiture; Hyde has an array of conservative and =
liberal co-sponsors. Hopefully Hyde will stick to his bill this time -- =
and at least begin the process of reform. In the last Congress, Hyde =
abandoned his own forfeiture reform bill after the Justice Department =
protested that it would reduce lawmen's power to seize property. Hyde then =
obligingly championed a Justice Department-written bill to expand =
government's confiscatory power. Hyde later again took up his own bill but =
made little or no effort to shepherd it into law. Forfeiture reform =
supporters were dumbfounded at Hyde's flip-flop and many questioned =
whether the congressman had the courage to carry forfeiture reform to the =
end.=20
The House of Representatives is expected to soon vote on forfeiture =
reform. No amount of flag-waving can compensate for congressmen's failure =
to protect citizens from the rapacity of law enforcement. Hopefully the =
forfeiture reform effort heralds a brave new era in which congressmen =
actually begin noticing how government abuses private citizens.=20

James Bovard is the author of Freedom in Chains: The Rise of the State & =
the Demise of the Citizen (St. Martin's Press, 1999).=20



-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "David Sagers" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fwd: EMERGENCY ALERT!! Congress Set to Abdicate
Date: 28 May 1999 10:55:10 -0600

MEDIUM RARE
By Jim Rarey
May 23, 1999
EMERGENCY ALERT!!


Congress Set to Abdicate

In the guise of fighting terrorism, the Congress is rushing through =
legislation that would delegate to the executive branch unprecedented (and =
unconstitutional) powers.


On Wednesday, May 19th at a hearing by the House Commerce Health and =
Environmental Sub-committee, legislation drafted by the administration  =
was discussed. The bill deals with hazardous materials and both accidental =
catastrophic spills and those caused by terrorism. The bill has been =
introduced by Republican (!) Representative Thomas Bliley of Virginia. The =
Republican leadership has scheduled the legislation to be cleared through =
the House and Senate for the president's signature by June 21st.

Among other things, the legislation would:

        1    Preempt (strike down) all state and local laws on =
availability of government records to the public.
2    Preempt all state and local Freedom of Information Acts (FOIA'S)=20=

3    Give the executive branch the authority to decide which requests =
for information from the federal government it would honor.
4    Give the executive branch the authority to issue "guidelines" as =
well as criminal penalties for violation of those "guidelines".
5    Prohibit the public from obtaining (in either written or electronic=
 form) information about "offsite consequences" of accidental catastrophic =
chemical incidents as well as those that might be caused by terrorists.
6    Allow the executive branch to establish (by executive order) =
criminal penalties for any state or local official who allows such =
information to reach the public in printed or electronic form.
7    Prohibits even federal officials from making such information =
available on the internet.=20

Additionally, Congress has given the authority to the president to write =
"privacy" laws if congress does not come up with acceptable legislation by =
August of this year. The president mentioned this in his public speech =
about his "privacy" agenda. My congressional representative verified that =
congress had indeed given him that authority. Her staff is in the process =
of hunting down the specific legislation that granted that unconstitutional=
 power.

Undoubtedly this same tactic is being used by the administration in other =
areas of proposed legislation. We must mount a massive protest to the =
congress to stop this dangerous and unconstitutional delegation of power =
to the executive branch.=20

Please forward this piece to every E-mail address you have. Then write =
your representative in congress and both of your senators expressing your =
outrage that they would even consider such actions. This is not a partisan =
issue. Both Republicans and Democrats on the sub-committee expressed =
"reservations" about some of the provisions. However the Republican =
leadership seems determined to rush the bill through the House and Senate.

If we lose this one, then congress has become irrelevant!

permission is granted to reproduce in its entirety or call Jim Rarey at
[phone]


-



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Finally something gun owners can support rather than oppose
Date: 28 May 1999 11:00:04 -0600

Admittedly, this will probably end up being tied to an aweful lot of
garbage that should be opposed.  But, if the garbage is going to pass, it
would be nice to get something good out of it.

Cannon Introduces Legislation To Ban
  Legal Gun-Owner Records



       BY JOHN HEILPRIN
       THE SALT LAKE TRIBUNE

           Rep. Chris Cannon plans to introduce legislation in Congress
that would
       bar federal authorities from keeping any "permanent government
record" of
       law-abiding citizens who own guns.
           The Utah Republican says the measure is a response to worries
among his
       conservative district's constituents. He supports mandatory
background
       checks on all gun buyers, he says, but the fear is that federal
officials will be in
       a position to confiscate everyone's guns.
           Cannon said the Brady Law that cracked down on firearms is
meant to
       keep dangerous people from owning guns, not for the government to
keep a
       record of legal gun owners.
           "The Second Amendment right to own a gun is tied inherently to
the right to
       not have the government know who owns a gun," Cannon said in a
statement.

           "Republicans and Democrats agree that criminals should not be
able to
       purchase guns," he said. "At the same time, the federal government
should not
       keep permanent records of law-abiding gun owners after they have
been
       cleared," he said.
           His spokesman, Rusty Payne, said: "We haven't been lobbied [by
the gun
       lobby] on this at all. . . . This is what gun owners are saying in
his district."
           With the use of new technology, the checks should be done
without any
       information being downloaded by a computer onto its hard drive,
Cannon
       said.
           He noted that when the Brady Law was passed, gun show sales
were
       excluded from background checks because the check took several
weeks.
           "We now have an automated data base that allows background
checks to
       be done in a couple of minutes so we can screen out felons
attempting to
       purchase guns at shows," Cannon said. "With a fully operational
data base of
       felons and other classes prohibited from buying guns, we can
eliminate any
       federal record about gun owners."
           At a House Judiciary crime subcommittee hearing on gun-control
       proposals Thursday, Cannon, who is not a member of the
subcommittee,
       asked how long the checks take to process. He was told the average
check
       takes between three and 10 minutes.
           Todd Taylor, state Democratic Party executive director, said
Cannon's
       proposal might help define the congressional debate.
           "There's been no legislation to date that's required any sort
of registry for
       guns. And before we go there, there ought to be some serious
debate on it.
       So, to the extent that this moves the debate along, that's a good
thing."
           Cannon's proposal mostly likely will be offered as an
amendment to the
       House version of the Senate-passed bill in June. The amendment
could come
       either on the House floor or in committee.
           "When there is a question as to whether a gun buyer is a
law-abiding
       citizen," Cannon said after the hearing, "there must be a process
where
       innocent people can easily clear their names. If a person passes a
check, his
       paperwork should be handed back and no records should exist
anywhere --
       even unindexed on a hard drive."
==================================================================
Charles C. Hardy
<[e-mail]>

___________________________________________________________________
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]

-