ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/utah-firearms/archive/utah-firearms.199911

Internet Message Format | 1999-11-29 | 164KB

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: FW: Exciting National Radio Interview about Dial 911 and Die
Date: 02 Nov 1999 04:27:00 -0700


-----

A two hour interview, when enough people realize
that govenment is under no positive obligation to
protect anyone, I suspect there will soon be less
government.

ALERT FROM JEWS FOR THE PRESERVATION OF FIREARMS OWNERSHIP
America's Aggressive Civil Rights Organization

October 31, 1999

Exciting National Radio Interview about Dial 911 and Die

National radio talk host Jeff Rense will interview JPFO's
Richard Stevens about Dial 911 and Die

Friday, November 5, 1999
7 P.M. Pacific  (8 P.M. Mountain)  (9 P.M. Central)
(10 P.M. Eastern)

You can also hear the program on the internet using
RealAudio.
Click on the website http://www.sightings.com/ and follow instructions.

The interview might be archived on that website also, so you
might be able to hear it at a later date.

If we can get a list of local radio stations, then we will send
that to you in a future alert.  (To sign up for JPFO alerts,
click on http://www.jpfo.org/ and follow the instructions.

Mr. Rense has indicated he will devote two hours to the interview.

Please pass this news on to all other web sites and forums
where people are interested in legal issues, personal and
family protection, firearms laws and individual rights.

Dial 911 and Die collects the law from all 50 states and
tells the stories that show how the government generally
owes no duty to protect individual citizens from crime or
criminal attack.  Every legal principle and story comes
from published legal authorities and case decisions (all
footnoted and referenced).  The book also contains 45
stories of successful personal self-defense against
aggressors, taken from news reports.

The book is only $11.95 postage paid.

The Liberty Crew at JPFO.

Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership
PO Box 270143
Hartford, Wisconsin 53027

Phone: [phone]
  Fax: [phone]
http://www.jpfo.org/

To subscribe to JPFO Alerts: send a blank e-mail to:

    [e-mail]

and respond to the confirmation message you will get back.


-



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

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: FW: African-Americans for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership
Date: 02 Nov 1999 04:27:00 -0700


-----

FWD via:

Bill Utterback
[e-mail]

For further information, please contact:
Leonard Whitley, 95 B Stoney Hill Rd.
Eatontown, NJ 07724
Tel. [phone] email: [e-mail]

INTRODUCTION:

Speaking as an African-American, I depend upon our representatives in
government and the African-American leaders in our communities to keep
you and me informed of racism in all its forms. Because we live in
Orwellian times, racism is more subtle today and is often disguised.

Needless to say I was shocked when a co-worker (who is white by the way)
handed me an essay titled "The Racist Roots of Gun Control" by Clayton E.
Cramer. This essay covers the long history of gun control in America,
and how it was originally used to keep African-Americans "in their place."
Originally, gun control laws were never intended for whites.

My question is: Why am I only learning of this now? How is it I never
learned this in school? Where is Al Sharpton? Jesse Jackson? NAACP?
Shouldn't they have brought this issue to light?

When I first started making copies of this essay and passing them out I
thought I would receive resistance from the Klan, Skin Heads, members
of the Aryan Nation, etc. But I never heard from them. However, I have
been contacted by representatives of the NAACP from several states
telling me to "back off" in my attempts to make these facts known. Each
call boils down to "...now is not the appropriate time..." Why not?

At the present time, the NAACP has a lawsuit against a number of firearms
manufacturers, claiming that they've flooded black communities with
firearms. (Fact of the matter is the manufacturers have no control over
where the firearms go -- that's determined by the dealers who order the
firearms.) Revealing the historical facts concerning how gun control
laws were racist in their beginnings would be counterproductive at this
time, I'm told.

If the NAACP goes through with their lawsuit at this time they can never,
I repeat, never, bring up the issue of how Blacks have been discriminated
against via racist gun laws in the future. How can the NAACP complain
that Blacks in America have been historically denied the protection of
the Second Amendment and at the same time sue firearms manufacturers for
selling guns to Blacks? They can't have it both ways. Besides, if the
NAACP does win the lawsuit, won't that make the cost of guns we need for
self-defense unaffordable for some poor people who might need them the
most?

To add insult to injury, it's almost as though the NAACP is saying that
none of us African-Americans can be trusted with firearms because the
criminal element misuses them. Are we really so irresponsible that we
let guns "flood" our neighborhoods, and then somehow let those guns jump
up and cause crime? Rather than make that argument, why doesn't the NAACP
go after the perpetrators of crime instead of gun manufacturers whose
product is absolutely necessary for defense against racists and criminals?

The purpose of this newsletter is to inform as many African-Americans
as possible about the true motives behind gun control.

"The Racist Roots of Gun Control" essay alerted me to the true nature of
gun control in America. Read it for yourself and decide if our leaders
and teachers have been keeping the truth from us. --Leonard Whitley

The essay: "The Racist Roots of Gun Control" may be found at:
http://gundebate.org/roots.htm

"All persons are by nature free and independent, and have certain
natural and unalienable rights, among which are those of enjoying and
defending life and liberty, of acquiring, possessing, and protecting
property, and of pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness."
--Article 1, Section 1, New Jersey State Constitution

*******************************************************************

A couple of times a week, on average, I forward messages that I
consider to be worthwhile. Occasionally I may be inspired to
write a brief editorial.

If you would like to begin receiving these messages, send me a
message with SUBSCRIBE in the subject field.

for Liberty (for all),
Bill Utterback
[e-mail]

-----

"We have the greatest opportunity the world has ever seen, as long
as we remain honest -- which will be as long as we can keep the
attention of our people alive. If they once become inattentive to
public affairs, you and I, and Congress and Assemblies, judges and
governors would all become wolves." Thomas Jefferson

"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate,
tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds."
Samuel Adams

"It is not the function of our Government to keep the citizen from
falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the
Government from falling into error." U.S. Supreme Court in American
Communications Association v. Douds, 339 U.S. 382,442

-----

World's Smallest Political Quiz
http://www.self-gov.org/quiz.html

Libertarian Party
http://www.lp.org/

Fully Informed Jury Association
http://www.fija.org/

Gun Owners of America
http://www.gunowners.org/

Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership
http://www.JPFO.org/

[Forwarded For Information Purposes Only - Not Necessarily Endorsed By
The Sender - A.K. Pritchard]


A.K. Pritchard
http://www.ideasign.com/chiliast/

To subscribe to "The Republican" email list - just ask!
[e-mail]

"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism, but under
the name of Liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist
program until one day America will be a Socialist nation without knowing
how it happened" -- Norman Thomas - Socialist Party Presidential
candidate Civil Liberties Union," Houghton Mifflin, 1976.


-



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

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: FW: He said it straight
Date: 03 Nov 1999 06:51:00 -0700


-----

A Speech by Lt. Harry Thomas,
Cincinnati Police Division FountainSquare, Cincinnati, Ohio
February 27, 1994

"Welcome to the People's Republic of Cincinnati! As usual, since
I am speaking publicly, I must make the following disclaimer: I
am not speaking to you as an official spokesman or representative
of the Cincinnati Police Division. If I don't say that, I'm
liable to have visitors waiting for me when I get back to work.

For the past 21 years, I have been a member of the Cincinnati
Police Division. On three occasions, I have sworn a solemn oath;
once when I was promoted from cadet to patrolman, once when I was
promoted from patrolman to sergeant, and yet again when I was
promoted from sergeant to lieutenant. That oath was to support
the Constitution of the United States of America.

I have buried almost a dozen of my fellow police officers who
died defending that oath. The last one died right before my eyes
in the major trauma room of University Hospital. I signed the
receipt for his body so that he could be transported to the
morgue. I think about those men often, and I think about what
they died for. And that is why I become furiously angry when I
see our Constitution, the most remarkable document ever written
in the course of human existence, being used as toilet paper at
every level of government.

The Brady Bill is now a reality. For the first time in the
history of our country, American citizens must request the
government's permission to exercise a constitutional right.
And if the government sees its way clear to grant permission,
we must wait 5 days to exercise that right.

But even this is not enough to please our keepers in
Sodom-by-the-Potomac. Gun laws are not being passed quickly
enough to suit our federal law enforcement agencies, so they have
formulated their own plan to discourage gun ownership.

In Ruby Ridge, Idaho, Sammy Weaver, age 14, the son of Randy
Weaver, a man who had taken his family to the mountains to
escape the tyranny of a government run amok, was hunting in the
forest near the Weaver cabin with his dog. He wasn't the only
person hunting in the forest that day. Sammy Weaver was ambushed
and fatally shot in the back by two United States Marshals. And
lest anyone accuse the U.S. Marshals of not being thorough in
the performance of their assigned tasks, I would point out that
they also shot the dog, also in the back.

Later, Vicki Weaver, Randy's wife and the mother of the Weaver
children, opened the door of the Weaver cabin to admit her husband,
who had been in a nearby shed to visit the body of his son. Vicki
Weaver was holding her 10 month old infant daughter in her arms.
That proved to be only a slight inconvenience to FBI sniper Lon
Horiuchi, as he shot Vicki Weaver through the head. She fell dead
to the floor, her skull exploded, still clutching her daughter in
her lifeless arms. It would appear that it is now a capital offense
to be the son, wife, or dog of a gun owner.

Waco. "Waco" is a word which, among American patriots, engenders
the same anguished feelings of outrage as the word "Alamo." Last
year at the NRA Convention in Nashville, my wife and I returned
to our hotel room and flipped on CNN to see the latest
developments in Waco. The Branch Davidian compound was burning.
My wife cried. She knew that there were many children in that
compound. She asked me why. Why are they burning the compound?
I told her the simple truth: They have to burn it. Has anyone
here seen and read the Waco search warrant affidavit? It's crap.
It didn't establish enough probable cause to even knock on the
Branch Davidian's door.

When the FBI took over from the BATF (which some people say
actually stands for Burn All Toddlers First), they knew that
they would find no illegal weapons in the Branch Davidian
compound. They were between a rock and a hard place. 4 ATF men
dead, an unknown number of Branch Davidians dead, the FBI had
only one choice: destroy the compound so that no one could ever
prove whether illegal weapons were present or not.

For hours, the FBI pumped supposedly non-lethal CS gas into the
compound. Those of us in law enforcement and the military know
differently. CS gas, in high concentrations in an enclosed area
is lethal. The first ones to be affected by vomiting, convulsions
unconsciousness and death, would be the children. The same
children that local Texas authorities found to be happy and
healthy under the care of the Branch Davidians.

The FBI did not pump CS gas into the Branch Davidian compound to
force its occupants to come out. They pumped gas in to make sure
the occupants couldn't come out. Dead gun owners, and dead gun
owner's children, tell no tales.

The time has come for us to openly discuss something that up to
this time we have mainly whispered about. The purpose of the 2nd
Amendment is to threaten the government. The framers of our
Constitution knew that government is a necessary evil, which, as
in the case of the British government, could easily become more
evil than necessary. The Founding Fathers wanted to ensure that
should that situation again come to pass, the American people
would have the capability to reclaim their country by force of
arms.

I believe that we are dangerously close to that day when we will
have to use the 2nd Amendment in exactly the manner that our
forefathers anticipated. When I was a boy, my father could buy
firearms through the mail. It was rightly believed at the time
that such a transaction was the business of the buyer, the gun
dealer and no one else. I lost that right with the passage of
the GCA in 1968. In my lifetime, I have been able to walk into
a gun store, select a handgun, and walk out of that store with
that gun in my hand. My children lost that right with the passage
of the Brady Bill. I'm not giving up any more rights.

I sincerely hope that a political solution to this problem is
still possible, and I will continue to work on the NRA Board of
Directors to try to find that solution. But if that solution
cannot be found, I say this to the megalomaniacs in Washington:

Pass your gun laws. I will not beg the government for a license
to continue to be a handgun owner. I will not submit to being
fingerprinted or photographed or interrogated like a criminal
for claiming my birthright as a free American. I will not
register a single gun that I own. I will not surrender a single
gun that I own. I will not apply for an "arsenal" license
because I own more than 20 guns or more than a thousand rounds
of ammunition. I will not attend mandatory safety training, nor
will I submit to a test to prove that I'm fit to be a gun owner.
And Miss Reno, I have this to say to you: If you send your
jack-booted, baby-burning bushwhackers to confiscate my guns,
pack them a lunch; it will be a damned long day. The Branch
Davidians were amateurs; I'm a professional.


-



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

From: "David Sagers" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fwd: Dr. Laura on Concealed Carry
Date: 04 Nov 1999 09:09:39 -0700

Received: from slkcpop1.slkc.uswest.net
    ([206.81.128.1])
    by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Wed, 03 Nov 1999 20:54:33 -0700
Received: (qmail 27492 invoked by alias); 4 Nov 1999 03:49:27 -0000
Delivered-To: [e-mail]@fixme
Received: (qmail 26658 invoked by uid 0); 4 Nov 1999 03:48:46 -0000
Received: from qdialup83.slkc.uswest.net (HELO uswest.net) (207.224.209.83)
  by slkcpop1.slkc.uswest.net with SMTP; 4 Nov 1999 03:48:46 -0000
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
     Neil Sagers <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

(Printed in Deseret News, Sunday October 10, 1999)
Responsible gun ownership might help reduce
violence
 Recent shooting sprees prompt an attitude change
By Dr. Laura Schlessinger

       I'm right in the middle of a big change of attitude about a very
important
subject. And I know a lot of my readers and listeners to my radio
program may be
shocked. But people who have known me over time know that I'm someone
who
evolves in public. That is, when I start changing my mind about
something or
discover new information or some truth about my own life or life in
general, I'm
usually pretty straightforward about the process with my colleagues and
my fans.
      The first event that caused me to rethink my position on this
topic was the
shootings in Atlanta, where a man went into two office buildings and
gunned down
total strangers, then killed himself in his car later that day. I
thought about the
difference it might have made * lives saved instead of lost * if someone
in one of
those offices had been armed. The murderer might well have been foiled
in his reign
of terror before so many innocent people died.
      That thought caused me to remember a time several years ago when I
felt
completely safe in my hometown of Los Angeles. It was after the major
earthquake
in 1994, and the National Guard was everywhere. There they were, it
seemed, on
every corner * uniformed, armed, ammunition slung across their chests,
ready. As
I recall, there was absolutely no crime in Los Angeles at that time * no
break-ins,
no holdups, no car-jackings. Nada. The bad guys obviously didn't want to
risk
getting shot.
      I went on the air then and said, "Gee, why can't these guys just
stay here?" and
everyone freaked out. Now, I knew then and know now that that's not what
the
National Guard is for, but it was nice to feel so secure for those few
weeks.
      In thinking about the difference an armed civilian or security
guard might have
made in Atlanta, I thought back to my trip to Israel this summer and how
many
people walking around, especially on the West Bank, were armed out of a
genuine
and persistent need to protect themselves. No one was shooting. There
was no
display of firepower or anything like that. It was just taken for
granted.
      I know that's a unique situation, because from its inception
Israel has been
under constant attack by neighboring countries, as well as terrorists.
So they have a
demonstrable need for self-defense.
      We, on the other hand, are self-destructing. We don't need an
external force.
We are breeding our own evil here. Child killers, killer children,
private militias,
home-grown and imported terrorists, to say nothing of old-fashioned,
garden variety
psychopaths and criminals * all armed and dangerous and now encouraged,
educated in evil and joined in unholy conspiracy on the World Wide Web.
      There are obviously lots and lots of reasons why our society *
once so
revered and respected around the world * is unraveling and degenerating.
But one
of them is the unbridled license of communication on the Internet. I
hear from so
many people about the shock and despair the Internet has brought into
their homes.
      The Internet is the most recent and most powerful tool to be
commandeered by
the sick evildoers in our midst. It spreads the virus of hate and germs
of pathology
like wildfire around the world, infecting more and more people,
especially our
neglected and vulnerable youths. Many of the most recent horrendous
crimes have
been committed by jerks, scum, low-lifes and dim bulbs who hang around
the
Internet because they have no life, fantasize about becoming heroes
through hate
and are emboldened to act out by others in cyberspace who support them.
      Even before the horror of the most recent attack on children in a
Los Angeles
Jewish center near my home, I was in the process of making up my mind to
find a
nice police officer or sheriff to teach me how to responsibly fire a
gun. I can hardly
believe I'm saying this, because I have been opposed to the idea that
everyone
should be free to bear arms. But the unpredictability of where danger
strikes next,
coupled with the frequency with which it happens, has led me to think
that we "good
guys" need to have more of the mentality of the beleaguered Israelis.
And, of
course, we need to have their attitude as well. No one is gun-happy over
there.
They don't show off, do stupid things.
      I agree that everyone who carries a gun must be licensed and that
the
regulations should be very strict. In order to be allowed to carry a
gun, I think we
should have to pass a test to make sure we can take it apart, put it
back together
again, clean it, load it, unload it, etc. And we should have to pass a
marksman's test
to get the gun and periodic tests to be allowed to keep it.
      To be perfectly honest, I haven't thought this all the way
through. It's just that
I'm getting more and more concerned about the direction in which our
society is
moving, and it's becoming clearer and clearer that we need protection
from
ourselves.
      I know this shocks a whole lot of you. And I'm sorry.

Please send correspondence to Dr. Laura in care of Universal Press
Syndicate, 4520 Main St., Kansas City, Mo. 64111. Dr.
Laura Schlessinger Dist. by Universal Press Syndicate




-



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

From: "David Sagers" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fwd: Honolulu: My letter to the editor
Date: 04 Nov 1999 16:02:24 -0700

Received: from fs1.mainstream.net
    ([206.97.102.4])
    by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Thu, 04 Nov 1999 12:54:31 -0700
Received: by fs1.mainstream.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA26826;
    Thu, 4 Nov 1999 14:51:11 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-Divvy-no: 1
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

The following letter to the editors of both daily papers got published in
this morning's Honlulu Advertiser.=20
Brian  =20

                    CALLING 911 DIDN'T WORK =20


It is a fact that the seven murder victims of Byran Uyesugi were caught by
surprise and defenseless. It's also a fact that had one or more persons in
that building on that terrible day been armed, they may have been able to
stop the killing. But it's official government policy here that all
citizens, no matter how upright, must remain defenseless at all times
except in their homes. That's because Hawaii State law allowing a person =
to
carry a concealed firearm is weak. So weak in fact that it is believed =
that
only one civilian in Honolulu has one.  =20

It's also a fact that calling 911 didn't work in this case. In fact it
often doesn't work. Yet that is the advice the police give when asked what
we should do if we find ourselves in danger. It's obviously time to
question this policy.

Since we will never eliminate violence, doesn't it make sense to prepare
for it? Rigorous studies have shown that violent crime decreases where
there are fewer restrictions on carrying concealed guns. That's because
criminals prefer to attack the defenseless. Israel is a case in point.
Since the government encouraged private citizens to carry concealed
firearms, terrorism has been greatly  reduced. Bottom line: shootings by
deranged madmen will go down when people are permitted to protect =
themselves.=20

Ironically and tragically our unrealistic 'feel good' anti-gun laws are a
contributing cause of these senseless massacres. Our lawmakers should
reverse this policy immediately.   =20
=20

Brian Baron, Chair=20
Hawaii Citizens' Rights Political Action Committee




-
To unsubscribe, send a message to [e-mail], and as the
body of the message (plain text, no HTML), send the following:
.
unsubscribe noban email-address
.
where email-address is the address under which you are subscribed.
Report problems to [e-mail]




-



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

From: "David Sagers" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fwd: Gun Ban Poll at www.vote.com, We're Losing! Vote Early;
Date: 05 Nov 1999 08:28:02 -0700

Received: from fs1.mainstream.net
    ([206.97.102.4])
    by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Fri, 05 Nov 1999 04:40:45 -0700
Received: by fs1.mainstream.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id GAA29372;
    Fri, 5 Nov 1999 06:37:53 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-Divvy-no: 1
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=_277E30A2.5E3F50B8"

--=_277E30A2.5E3F50B8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

In a message dated 11/5/99 3:08:09 AM Eastern Standard Time, NJGunsRus =
writes:

<< http://www.vote.com/vote/1180/ >>


--=_277E30A2.5E3F50B8
Content-Type: message/rfc822

Return-path: [e-mail]
Full-name: NJGunsRus
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-Mailer: AOL for Macintosh sub 54
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

http://www.vote.com/vote/1180/


--=_277E30A2.5E3F50B8--

-



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

From: Joe Waldron <[e-mail]>
Subject: MOUT RESOURCE SITE--CONSPIRACY THEORY HEAVEN!
Date: 05 Nov 1999 09:01:54 -0800

Weekend coming up, rain forecast in the Northwest calls for indoor work
(if we're not out hunting random shooters).  People need something to
read and get them spun up.  A gander at the following web site should do
that!  Get yer colanders and aluminium foil out...




The following website offers a potpourri of military information put
together by Colonel Anthony A. Wood, USMC

Urban Warrior Conceptual Experimental Framework

MOUT: Technology - Weapons - Equipment
http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/6453/techa.html

-



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

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: SL Trib: Guns Deadlier Than Car Crashes
Date: 05 Nov 1999 16:33:00 -0700


http://www.sltrib.com/11051999/utah/44292.htm

The Salt Lake Tribune -- Guns Deadlier Than Car Crashes

Friday, November 5, 1999

BY NORMA WAGNER
THE SALT LAKE TRIBUNE

Gunshot wounds last year in Salt Lake County occurred more frequently
than new cases of tuberculosis, AIDS and hepatitis A, and caused more
deaths than automobile accidents.

After several high-profile shootings in Utah and around the nation in
the past year, the Salt Lake City-County Board of Health asked the
health department's Family Health Services division to research the
circumstances surrounding shootings across the valley throughout 1998,
including the sex and average age of the victims, location and type of
firearm used.

Nothing the investigators found indicated Utah is any different
from other parts of the nation, particularly in the percentage of
shooting victims who died. But they plan to use the data to come up
with some possible interventions -- a project to be funded through
a $30,000 Harvard University grant during the study's second phase.

"We wanted to know what the situation in regards to shootings was in
our county because we know that legislators are going to take some
position on guns. We just don't know when," said health department
spokeswoman Jana Carlson-Kettering.

It is the Board of Health's policy to take a position on such issues,
and members said they would do so based on the information gathered
in the "gunshot wound surveillance data" report.

Investigators gathered information for their report from hospital
records, medical examiner reports and death certificates, then looked
at police reports for supplemental information.

They discovered that of the 201 people shot in 1998, 88 victims
died -- 44 percent.

"There's very little opportunity for intervention [in reducing that
death rate)," health department epidemiologist Catherine Steas told
Board of Health members during their Thursday meeting. "It doesn't
matter how good the emergency rooms or emergency medical technicians
are."

Most injuries (83 percent) occurred among males, putting them at more
than four times the risk of being gunshot victims than females. And
the majority of victims (78 percent) were between the ages of 15 to 39.

"But if you take into account the population of the age group, the
highest percent (of shooting victims) are between 15 and 19 years of
age," Steas said.

Children as young as six years of age were unintentionally shot,
and adults as old as 90 committed suicide.

More than 70 percent of the injuries were caused by a handgun, the
rest by a shotgun or rifle. The majority of shootings (64 percent)
occurred in a public place, including a public library, parks,
restaurant parking lots, roadways and places of business. None
occurred in a church or school.

On average, gunshot injuries occur once every two days in the
county, Steas said, and deaths from those injuries occur once every
four days. Suicide attempts peak between noon and 4 p.m.; assaults
peak between 8 p.m. and 4 a.m.

Eighty-six percent of firearm injuries were intentional, with
forty-four percent gang-related. Eleven percent were unintentional,
and the remaining 3 percent could not be explained.

Thirty percent of the victims who were killed had detectable
levels of alcohol in their blood,18 percent with drugs of abuse.

And the public pays, Steas said. Three-fourths of the shooting
victims lacked private insurance, and medical costs of treating
all 201 victims were estimated to exceed $1.3 million.

We learned a lot about what we can and cannot get from this
information," Steas said. "Firearm injuries are common, lethal
and costly to the public. From what I've seen of the national data,
(the county) is basically similar to what we see nationwide."

The researchers plan to continue collecting and expanding the data.
In the study's second phase, Steas said, they will try to discern if
the guns used were purchased for self protection. Board of Health
member and pediatrician Lucy Osborne also asked Steas to include
injuries from BB guns and pellet guns, which don't often result in
death, but can lead to debilitating injuries, such as blindness.

"My sense is this is a ground-breaking study, that we are again
leading the way," said Board of Health Chairman Jane Connard.
"This is very interesting, informative information."

Copyright 1999, The Salt Lake Tribune


-



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

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: FW: GOA on GOOD NEWS for FREEDOM
Date: 06 Nov 1999 11:56:00 -0700


Good News For Those Who Love Freedom -- Congress torpedoes free speech
restrictions, National ID card

Gun Owners of America E-Mail/FAX Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102,
Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: [phone] / FAX: [phone]
http://www.gunowners.org

(Friday, October 22, 1999) -- Gun owners cheered this week when efforts to
squelch free speech were shelved for the year.  Senator Mitch McConnell
(R-KY) was the mastermind behind the successful filibuster that killed
legislation limiting the political speech of ordinary Americans.

Supporters of the Senate bill (S. 1593) fell seven votes short of breaking
the McConnell filibuster.  While the Senate bill definitely had its
problems, the House version (H.R. 417) would have severely restricted the
ability of groups like GOA to report on incumbents' voting records during
the election season.  Killing the bill in the Senate effectively dooms the
egregious House bill.

GOA thanks its members for contacting their Senators in support of the
McConnell filibuster.

Gun Owners Dodge Registration As Congress Tears Up National ID Card

Gun Owners of America made a last-ditch effort recently to preserve
legislation effectively gutting the National ID card.  Thankfully, the hard
work paid off, and the National ID system that was supposed to go on line
next year is now dead.

Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) led the fight on the Hill against the National ID.
"This is a great moment for all Americans," he said. "Thousands of Americans
should feel great pride in knowing their calls and letters to Members of
Congress succeeded in stopping the National ID."

Under the provisions of legislation passed three years ago, no one would be
allowed after October 1, 2000 to purchase a gun, board a plane, open a bank
account, go to a doctor, enter a school or take a new, private sector job
without having a National ID card.

It is quite possible that the ID card could have become a vehicle for
encrypting all kinds of personal information on it, including a person's
fingerprints, gun owner status, etc.  The creation of a National ID card
could have easily facilitated attempts by anti-gun bureaucrats to register
innocent gun owners.

The House of Representatives killed the ill-conceived National ID plan in
the bill that funds the Transportation Department.  The legislation became
law on October 9.


Gun Owners To Benefit As Rep. Paul Moves To Rein In Executive Orders

Meanwhile, the House will be holding hearings next week on key legislation
introduced by Rep. Paul.  This bill will restrict the power of presidents to
legislate by Executive Order, or by any other type of presidential
proclamation or directive.  The bill is H.R. 2655, the Separation of Powers
Restoration Act.

It is not too difficult to imagine how an anti-gun President like Bill
Clinton could use these declarations to greatly abuse gun owners' rights.
Speaking on the topic of Executive Orders, former Clinton Advisor Paul
Begala was quoted in the New York Times on July 5, 1998, as saying, "Stroke
of the pen.  Law of the Land.  Kinda cool."

Of course, Executive Orders are not the only kind of presidential
proclamation that can violate gun owners' rights.  In November 1997, Clinton
issued a directive placing a 120-day freeze on the importation of certain
semi-automatic firearms.  His administration later followed with an outright
ban, thus keeping 58 firearms from ever coming into the country again.
Paul's legislation would deny Presidents the opportunity to ban guns by
executive fiat.

Gun owners should ask their Representatives to cosponsor H.R. 2655. You can
call the Capitol at 202-225-3121. Please see the GOA website for fax and
e-mail contact info.


-



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

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: FW: Candor Control
Date: 06 Nov 1999 11:56:00 -0700


Washington Bulletin: National Review's Internet Update for 11/4/99
http://www.nationalreview.com/
by Ramesh Ponnuru and John J. Miller

CANDOR CONTROL
Finally, some honesty from the anti-gun crowd: In today's New York Times,
Josh Sugarmann, executive director of the Violence Policy Center, admits
(1) that his goal is a ban on handguns and (2) that most of the lesser gun
controls being discussed couldn't conceivably achieve much. But not even
Sugarmann wants an honest debate on this proposal in Congress. Instead, he
thinks that Congress should "give the Treasury Department health and safety
authority over the gun industry." He continues, "[A]ny rational regulator
with that authority would ban handguns." A short op-ed, yet how much it
reveals about the anti-gun movement's coercive ambitions, refusal to
concede rationality to its opponents, and undemocratic instincts.

QUOTE UNQUOTE
Mark Steyn in today's National Post, on Ted Kennedy's recent references to
the Stockpile Stewardship Program as the "Stockpile Stewardess Program":
"No doubt his aides were quietly relieved the senator hasn't spoken out on
behalf of the Comprehensive Breast Tan Treaty. Still, we all know where Ted
stands on the issue: He's in favour of arms control and, as a guy whose
arms could use controlling, he knows whereof he speaks."



-



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

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: FW: Hit Back at Anti-Gunners - Citizens Of America Update 1/2
Date: 06 Nov 1999 11:56:00 -0700


-----

Hit Back at Anti-Gunners - Citizens Of America Update--from Russ Howard

COA has received nearly $4,000 in PLEDGES (not donations) from the
$100-squared match. Happily, nearly half of you who made pledges went
ahead and mailed in $100 donations even though we're far from the
$10,000 initial goal. Thanks to those donations, COA was able to
produce its first radio & print ads, many of which can be seen and
heard on the new web site:

www.citizensofamerica.org ... Check it out.

I especially recommend viewing the "Niggertown Saturday Night Special"
ad. Takes a while to load, but worth the wait. The ads are powerful
and they fulfill COA's implicit promise to - as my friend Fred Darling
once put it - "engage the enemy."

*** World Net Daily - national media exposure for COA -

COA recently made WorldNetDaily. The writer, John Dougherty, endorsed
the program and urged readers to donate. Here are some excerpts:

**********

'Assault' advertising supports guns...

"A violent blow to the window...breaks the silence of the night. A
woman gasps as she reaches for the phone... As the intruder enters...,
the woman...pleads for operators to answer... Instead...she is greeted
with..., "All lines are busy -- please hold for the next available
9-1-1 operator."

She panics. The intruder is moving towards her now, knife in hand...She
starts to scream but is muted by the intruder's hand -- or worse, his
weapon. Finally,..."9-1-1, what is your emergency?" The woman doesn't
answer..."Hello? Is anyone there?"... Silence. It's too late.

This...is...one of several scenarios being formulated into... radio, TV
& print ads by...L.A.-based...Citizens of America.., demonstrating the
hypocrisy of...Brady,...Feinstein, &... Schumer, all of whom have access
to personal security... paid for by the very taxpayers they deny similar
protection...

COA's approach is brilliant,...show...that...anti-gunners,... not...guns
in the hands of...responsible adults,...kill more people... In another ad,
a "criminal spokesperson"..."admits" what...real criminals have [said] for
years -- that they love anti-gun laws because they love...an unarmed victim...

Most refreshing...is the attitude of those who created this ad campaign.
They seem fed up with...compromising...gun makers & gun groups. On the
2nd Amendment, there is no compromising with the [il]liberal left. The
latter has one goal...--...banning...all guns...

COA's mission statement says it all: "There is a...need for a...group,
which can strike fast,...hard, and... without fear... COA will not be
apologetic, it will not play fair, it will hit below the belt whenever
the opportunity presents itself...To destroy those who are tampering
with 2nd Amendment freedom."...

Normally I don't do this, but it's late in the game and...we're all in
danger of losing our hedge against total tyranny... Visit the COA web
site...and send them some dough... My check's ...in the mail..."Preaching
to the choir" isn't good enough anymore; ...it's time to take the message
to the masses..."

********
By space necessity, the chopped version above does little
justice to the full article. To read it go to:
www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_dougherty_com/19991013_xcjod_assault_ad.shtml

*** Radio Ads Already Running

Radio ads have already been run on at least 32 stations, free of charge,
primarily during interviews of COA founders. Also, many people have
written COA requesting permission to run COA ads on their local station at
their own expense. So many that COA is developing a program to enable it.

This adopt-an-ad program involves an agreement wherein the person or group
sponsoring an ad is simply required to run it in full and unaltered. Those
who do this can expect to pay an average of about $400-450 for each spot
broadcast to an average audience of say, 250,000. Prices will vary depending
on how big the station is, etc., and some of you may have connections at
local stations who will run ads as public service announcements (PSAs).

The new program is innovative and powerful. If nothing else,
it's a confidence builder for COA's promise that every dollar
it gets goes into ads. To COA, the paramount issue is that the
ads are seen and heard. Advantages of adopting an ad include:

* Total control over your donation. You know it's spent
efficiently, since you're spending it.

* You choose the ads to run, so you can run your favorite ads.

* You can run ads where YOU think they're needed most. For example, you
may want to work on decreasing support for gun control in your own backyard,
and this way you can be sure your money gets there. And you may have
insight into the more productive places to run the ads in your local area.

* Force multiplier for COA. Scores of Citizens of America can be making
contact with stations, talk show hosts, etc., arranging for the ads to
run as PSAs.

Many gun rights supporters have become skeptical after the zillions of
wasteful direct mail fundraisers with the same tired pleas by you-know-who
to send money to pay for the next wasteful mailer -- well, that and
fat salaries & expense accounts; and sweetheart deals for vendors,
self-dealing Directors and gun-grabbing police-state Republicans.

You can't be sure if there's anything left over after all that, but
if there is, you have no control over it and no way to be sure it
won't be used to promote gun control schemes like safety-free school
zones, insta-reg, and Project Gun Gulag (AKA, Project Exile) under
which ALL existing gun laws will be enforced with "zero tolerance"
and gun "criminals" - including decent people who have already been
"caught" once exercising their rights - will be "exiled" to federal
concentration camps for minimum 5-year terms. (Oh hell, let's make
it life if you're "caught" 3 times carrying for self-defense or
possessing an "illegal" weapon.)

So for the skeptical among you who want accountability in your donations,
COA's program guarantees you get what you pay for and not what you don't.

Unfortunately, most of us don't have the dough to repeatedly run ads
for $450 a pop, so for us donating to COA is the way to go. And there
are advantages to running the ads through COA. For example, your
donation along with many others makes a large enough pool to enable
COA to get quantity discounts.

Other advantages include specialization of labor, AKA, "not having to
reinvent the wheel," and division of labor, AKA, "one person doing the
work of many." COA has access to savvy folks like Jim Houck who already
know the how, where, and when of running ads effectively and economically.

And you needn't worry about COA wasting your money or becoming the kind
of group you've come to tolerate (or loathe, as the case may be). As
Houck points out, COA doesn't even have memberships. Every freedom-loving
American is already considered a member.

But funding is not yet sufficient for a serious paid ad campaign. You
can help make that next step happen by digging deep and becoming part of
the 2ANews $100-squared match, or donating "more than you really should"!

To support the $10,000 match for COA, e-mail me with your
pledge at [e-mail], or simply mail donations to:

Citizens Of America
PMB 447
2118 WILSHIRE BLVD.
SANTA MONICA, CA 90403

For questions about this campaign, please contact COA's
President, Brian Puckett, at [e-mail]

-- Russ Howard
[ Continued In Next Message... ]




-



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

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: FW: Hit Back at Anti-Gunners - Citizens Of America Update 2/2
Date: 06 Nov 1999 11:56:00 -0700


[ ...Continued From Previous Message ]
The Juvenile Justice Bill (Senate Bill S254) contains
provisions to track private sales at gun shows, producing
records that can be used against you in the future.

It is a registration of sale of a firearm. Registration is the one
thing that makes confiscation possible. Anti-gun politicians can only
steal guns if they have a record of firearms ownership. GET BETWEEN
THESE RECORDS AND YOUR GOVERNMENTS ANY WAY YOU CAN.

Call your Congressman and Senators, and the offices of these so-called
Republican leaders, and complain. Defeat the anti-gun provisions
including the "registration" of sales to the Juvenile Justice Bill.

You can call your two Senators at [phone] and your
Representative at [phone] at the Capitol Switchboard.
Here is the URL for Congressional Telephone Directory:
http://clerkweb.house.gov/106/mbrcmtee/members/teledir/members/cdframe.htm
For legislative updates contact www.nealknox.com and go to
"Scripts from the Firearms COAlition Legislative Update Line"

-Weldon Clark

****************************

The 2ndAmendmentNews Team

To join please send:
E-MAil to [e-mail] with the following text in the message body:

subscribe 2nd-Amendment-News email@address

To send a message to the list administrator, send E-mail to
[e-mail]

Feel free to forward our alerts.

If you've received this as a forward and wish to subscribe
please send a reply to me at [e-mail]

Cordially Yours,
The 2ndAmendmentNews Team

2ndAmendmentNews is published by volunteer activists who support
the full original individual rights intent of the 2nd Amendment
and oppose any appeasement on gun rights. The moderators include
Chris Behanna, Weldon Clark (an NRA director) and Steve Cicero.

If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude
better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace.
We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which
feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity
forget that ye were our countrymen. -- Samuel Adams, speech at the
Philadelphia State House, August 1, 1776.



-



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

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: Fw: Why Orrin Must Go!
Date: 08 Nov 1999 04:29:00 -0700


-----

With socialists like Orrin who needs to worry about Chuckie Schumer?

Orrin Hatch, Henry Hyde and the FBI:
-- Just three reasons why you need to call your Congressmen soon!

Gun Owners of America E-Mail/FAX Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: [phone] / FAX: [phone]
http://www.gunowners.org

"Juvenile justice is alive and well," said an aide to Sen. Hatch.
"Hatch met as late as last week with some of the [Congressional]
leaders, and it is not dead." -- Associated Press, 11/2/99

(Friday, November 5, 1999) -- The buzz in Washington right now is
that some of the moderates in the GOP leadership are desperately
trying to get a vote on the anti-gun juvenile crime bill before the
session ends next week. According to the Associated Press, Senator
Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Rep. Henry Hyde (R-IL) are the chief culprits
behind this sellout.

"I remain optimistic that some compromise is possible," said Hyde.
"Senator Hatch and I have pulled together a proposal that closes the
gun-show loophole and offers a number of other modest yet effective
gun safety provisions." But the truth be known, these proposals are
neither modest nor effective-- not to mention that they will not
result in additional safety.

While different drafts are being discussed, all have one thing in
common-- they all contain gun control. One of the main sticking
points is a waiting period requirement for private sales at gun shows.
According to the New York Times, "The latest Republican offer includes
a provision giving [the FBI] 24 hours to conduct the mandatory
background checks, unless that check turns up a disqualifying arrest....
In that event, the [FBI] would have three days to complete the check"
and find out the final disposition of the arrest.

There are other proposals as well, including a young adult gun ban,
a trigger lock requirement, and an import ban on large-capacity ammo
mags among other things. But regardless of the specifics, gun owners
should urge their Congressman one last time to vote NO on the
juvenile crime bill. (See ACTION below).

GOA Members Criticized By FBI As It Tries To Divert Attention Away
From Its Dirty Laundry

Just a few miles away from Capitol Hill, the FBI issued an interesting
report on Monday entitled Project Megiddo. The report tries to shift
public attention away from the FBI's long list of scandals to a
problem of their own invention-- namely, the threat of "right wing"
terrorism at the turn of the century.

The report itself admits there are "very few indications" of specific
threats to domestic security. Nevertheless, the report goes out of its
way to take a whack at the President's political opponents. Having
said that, guess who is listed in the report as being crucial to
"understanding the phenomenon of domestic terrorism"? You guessed it.
You are.

In an attempt to demonize Clinton's political opposition, the FBI has
listed gun owners as part of the domestic terrorism equation. In fact,
the report accuses GOA Executive Director Larry Pratt of helping to
"fuel the already existing paranoia of militia and patriot groups."

Hogwash. If the FBI is serious about not fueling existing paranoia,
then it should stop maintaining files on leading Americans (remember
Filegate?), and come clean on what it knows about Waco. The FBI took
six years to discover they had withheld information about Waco from
Congress, including their own use of pyrotechnic devises and the use
of the military the day the Davidians were burned to death. For more
information on this report and GOA's brief response to it, go to
http://www.gunowners.org/fs9904.htm at the GOA website. The entire
report is available from the FBI; you will need Adobe Acrobat to read
it. At http://www.fbi.gov/library/megiddo/publicmegiddo.pdf

ACTION: Tell your Congressmen that, in contrast to what the FBI is
saying, decent gun owners are not the problem in this country. Let
them know that we don't need gun control; we need government control.
Also, make sure they know that NO compromise gun legislation is
acceptable in the juvenile crime bill (S. 254 / H.R. 1501). You can
reach your Senators and Representative at 202-225-3121 or toll-free
at 877-722-7494.

Even the ACLU opposes the bill (albeit for different reasons). They
have established a free Congressional fax service that can be
accessed at http://www.aclu.org/action/juvenile106.html on their
website. GOA's Auto-Mailer at http://www.gunowners.org/mailerx.html
can be used to send e-mail to Congress.

**************
GOA continues to seek online newspaper stories of citizens using a gun
in lawful self-defense. In particular, stories from smaller market
newspaper websites are needed. As you know, the national media rarely
picks up stories of this type. Please forward any such stories you run
across to GOA.



-



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

From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fw: ALERT! Orrin Hatch on Doug Wright Show!
Date: 09 Nov 1999 11:13:59 -0700

Attachments mentioned won't make it through, but try to call in and give
Hatch a good working over.

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

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

I have just heard this morning that Orrin Hatch will be on the Doug
Wright
show on KSL radio.  I'm not sure at what time this show is presented, but
I
have included a link to KSL radio, which you can receive by Web.Also, I
have attached a file (in Word and WP formats) prepared by Gun Owners of
America that documents votes by Hatch attacking your right to keep and
bear
arms.  Orrin needs to be asked why he supports legislation that imprisons
law-abiding gun owners for exercising their right of self-defense
guaranteed by the Second Amendment.  He also need to be asked whether he
will allow S. 254 to come out of the conference committee with any gun
control legislation included.

http://www.ksl.com/radio/

___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.

-



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

From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fw: Alert: Leg. Gun control
Date: 10 Nov 1999 15:05:04 -0700


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

--------- Forwarded message ----------
Legislators meeting:

What: Gun Control
When: 7pm  Nov. 10
Where: West Jordan High School (About 7900 So 2700 West)

Meetings are being held all over Utah.  Please don't let the excuse for
more gun control be, only gun control supporters were there, and not gun
advocates.

If you care about the gun issue, please be there.

___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.

-



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

From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fw: Oct. 20 column -- women need guns
Date: 11 Nov 1999 15:42:56 -0700


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

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

    FROM MOUNTAIN MEDIA
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE DATED OCT. 20, 1999
    THE LIBERTARIAN, By Vin Suprynowicz
    Give these women guns


    The newspapers reported Donna Hernandez of Las Vegas did everything
she
could to protect herself. Fearing that her estranged husband was going to
kill her, she repeatedly informed the police that she feared for her
life.
She even went to court and got protection orders.

  Seven of them.

  It didn't help. Two weeks ago, Donna Hernandez was found stabbed and
strangled in her home. Her ex-husband is now in jail, facing murder
charges.

  About a third of all slayings in the Las Vegas Metro police
jurisdiction
stem from domestic violence. In October of 1997, 17-year-old Maureen
McConaha obtained a protective order against her ex-boyfriend. Weeks
later,
she was shot to death. The ex-boyfriend, Johnny Walker, is awaiting trial
on murder charges.

  In January of 1998, police found Judy and Ronnie Norman dead inside the
couple's Las Vegas home. Next to their bodies police found a protective
order that Judy Norman had taken out against her husband. Police ruled
the
deaths a murder-suicide.

  In October of last year, Brenda Denise James was shot to death in front
of her six children, days after she applied for and received a protective
order against her ex-boyfriend, Robert Lee Carter, 30. A murder charge
against Carter is pending.

  While court-issued protective orders are "a good tool for law
enforcement, they don't stop a bullet or knife, and we need to make sure
everyone knows  that," offers Clark County Domestic Violence Commissioner
Patricia Doninger.

  "We have to find a better way to protect people like Donna Hernandez,"
says a frustrated District Judge Nancy Saitta.

  But that better way has long been available. God may have made women,
but
Colonel Colt made women equal, and carrying the tool he invented remains
the constitutional right of every American.

  The problem is, so far as can be determined, Donna Hernandez, Maureen
McConaha, and Brenda Denise James did (start ital)not(end ital) do
everything they could to protect themselves and their children: They did
not buy and carry handguns, and acquire the skill to use them.

  Police cannot provide an armed bodyguard for every woman who's been
threatened. Therefore, police should actively recommend that such women
acquire appropriate, effective weapons for self-defense, and the minimal
training necessary to handle them safely.

  In fact, if any arbitrary "background check" or "concealed-carry
permit"
paperwork delays stand in the way of a woman who holds such a valid
"protection order" and wishes to acquire a handgun, our state lawmakers
--
and particularly U.S. Rep. Shelley Berkley, a proponent of women's rights
and an avowed supporter of the Second Amendment -- should immediately
introduce legislation to provide for an instant waiver of any such
waiting
periods or bureaucratic delays, authorizing the immediate, legal
placement
of a handgun in any such woman's purse.

  Those with an irrational phobia of firearms -- though they would never
propose that we send our boys to Bosnia armed with nothing more than a
whistle on a key ring -- will whine that "A woman is in greater danger if
she has a gun; the assailant will just take it away and use it on her."

  In fact, Gary Kleck, professor of criminology at Florida State
University
in Tallahassee, examined the statistical evidence for that concern in his
book, "Targeting Guns."

  Guns are taken away from their owner and used by an assailant in fewer
than 1 percent of defensive handgun uses, Professor Kleck determined. Nor
is there any indication that more widespread gun ownership would turn our
neighborhoods into "shooting galleries": Dr. Kleck also found that in
more
than 90 percent of defensive handgun uses, the weapon isn't even fired.

  "It's one of the great lies of the anti-gun people, that people are so
incompetent that they're going to have their guns taken away from them,"
says David Kopel, research director of the Independence Institute in
Golden, Colo. and author of the book "Guns: Who Should Have Them?"

  In fact, if the authorities would send out a notice that the victim is
now armed, along with the court "keep-away" order, most of these attacks
might never occur, at all.

  "There's very strong evidence that knowledge that victims have guns is
a
great deterrent to attacking," adds Don Kates, a criminologist with the
Pacific Research Institute in California. "The National Institute of
Justice has sponsored extensive surveys of criminals in prisons, and ...
they attest that they were far less likely to commit crimes against
people
when they knew that they were likely to be armed.

  "The other thing is, it is universally reported that women respond much
better to firearms training than men do, because the problem with men is
that their testosterone levels get in the way," Mr. Kates explains.
"They're supposed to already know about guns, and so you have to get them
to unlearn things that they know that are wrong, and they're very
stubborn
about that."

  So, if at-risk women find it easy to learn to use guns safely and
effectively, why aren't they all urged by authorities to go out and get
themselves a Smith & Wesson?

  "That's to admit that the whole system is a complete failure," explains
criminologist Kates. "Notice that the whole thing with restraining orders
is a failure designed to remedy a failure. We already have laws against
violence, so why do we need restraining orders? Because police won't
enforce laws against violence within the family."

  October is Domestic Violence Awareness Month, a time when our political
leaders annually call on us to reflect on the number of domestic-violence
incidents that occur each year, and to take action to stop them.

  OK then. Let's stop mooning and moaning. Let's do something that works.

  It's not big, sturdy men who fear to be the last person leaving the
shopping mall late at night, walking across that darkened parking lot.
It's
America's women.

  Let's really reduce violence against our womenfolk. Let's give them
guns.


Vin Suprynowicz is the assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas
Review-Journal. His new book, "Send in the Waco Killers," is available at
1-800-244-2224, or via web site
http://www.thespiritof76.com/wacokillers.html.

***




Vin Suprynowicz,   [e-mail]

"The evils of tyranny are rarely seen but by him who resists it." -- John
Hay, 1872

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed --
and
thus clamorous to be led to safety -- by menacing it with an endless
series
of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." -- H.L. Mencken

* * *


------
If you have subscribed to [e-mail] and you wish to
unsubscribe,
send a message to [e-mail], from your OLD address,
including
the word "unsubscribe" (with no quotation marks) in the "Subject" line.

To subscribe, send a message to [e-mail], from your
NEW address, including the word "subscribe" (with no quotation marks)
in the "Subject" line.

All I ask of electronic subscribers is that they not RE-forward my
columns
until on or after the embargo date which appears at the top of each, and
that (should they then choose to do so) they copy the columns in their
entirety, preserving the original attribution.

The Vinsends list is maintained by Alan Wendt in Colorado, who may be
reached directly at [e-mail]. The web sites for the Suprynowicz
column are at http://www.infomagic.com/liberty/vinyard.htm, and
http://www.nguworld.com/vindex. The Vinyard is maintained by Michael Voth
in Flagstaff, who may be reached directly at [e-mail].


___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.

-



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

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: FW: Hatch selling out again!
Date: 12 Nov 1999 07:56:00 -0700


Will not one deliver us from Senator Jerk?

Orrin Hatch is at it again, selling out your gun rights. He and Leavitt
were told at the Ogden convention (by vote remember?) not to restrict guns.

Well, good old boy Hatch (and Leavitt) I reckon have taken a gander at it,
and must have come to the conclusion, we common folk are just to dumb for
our own good. He's gonna doer any way (take away our gun rights), of
course, for our best interest.

I strongly encourage you to read this report. To me this shows Orrin Hatch
more interested in becoming Pres. than representing Utah. (Like that would
surprise you!)

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

Summary:

* Orrin Hatch & Henry Hyde are the ones behind the selling out of your gun
rights

* Hyde said "Senator Hatch and I have pulled together a proposal that
closes the gun-show loophole and offers a number of other modest yet
effective gun safety provisions." [Oh thanks Orrin, you should run
for Vise Pres. with Al Bore, (OOPs) Gore.]

* Giving [the FBI] 24 hours to 3 days in order to conduct the mandatory
background checks. [This would eliminate gun shows.]

* Waiting period requirement for private sales.
[If this is not gun registration, what is?]

* The FBI has listed gun owners as part of the domestic terrorism equation.
[I don't think you a terrorist.]

* Project Megiddo
[This is worth reading]

* ACTION: Tell your Congressmen that, in contrast to what the FBI is
saying, decent gun owners are not the problem in this country. Let them
know that we don't need gun control; we need government control. Senators
and Representative at 202-225-3121 or toll-free at 877-722-7494.

* Even the ACLU opposes the bill (albeit for different reasons).

* More ways to contact below.

Orrin Hatch, Henry Hyde and the FBI: -- Just three reasons why you need to
call your Congressmen soon!


From GOA

"Juvenile justice is alive and well," said an aide to Sen. Hatch. "Hatch met
as late as last week with some of the [Congressional] leaders, and it is not
dead." -- Associated Press, 11/2/99

(Friday, November 5, 1999) -- The buzz in Washington right now is that some
of the moderates in the GOP leadership are desperately trying to get a vote
on the anti-gun juvenile crime bill before the session ends next week.
According to the Associated Press, Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Rep. Henry
Hyde (R-IL) are the chief culprits behind this sellout.

"I remain optimistic that some compromise is possible," said Hyde. "Senator
Hatch and I have pulled together a proposal that closes the gun-show
loophole and offers a number of other modest yet effective gun safety
provisions." But the truth be known, these proposals are neither modest nor
effective-- not to mention that they will not result in additional safety.

While different drafts are being discussed, all have one thing in common--
they all contain gun control. One of the main sticking points is a waiting
period requirement for private sales at gun shows. According to the New York
Times, "The latest Republican offer includes a provision giving [the FBI]
24 hours to conduct the mandatory background checks, unless that check turns
up a disqualifying arrest.... In that event, the [FBI] would have three days
to complete the check" and find out the final disposition of the arrest.

There are other proposals as well, including a young adult gun ban, a
trigger lock requirement, and an import ban on large-capacity ammo mags
among other things. But regardless of the specifics, gun owners should
urge their Congressman one last time to vote NO on the juvenile crime
bill. (See ACTION below).


GOA Members Criticized By FBI As It Tries To Divert Attention Away From Its
Dirty Laundry

Just a few miles away from Capitol Hill, the FBI issued an interesting
report on Monday entitled Project Megiddo. The report tries to shift public
attention away from the FBI's long list of scandals to a problem of their
own invention-- namely, the threat of "right wing" terrorism at the turn of
the century.

The report itself admits there are "very few indications" of specific
threats to domestic security. Nevertheless, the report goes out of its way
to take a whack at the President's political opponents. Having said that,
guess who is listed in the report as being crucial to "understanding the
phenomenon of domestic terrorism"? You guessed it. You are.

In an attempt to demonize Clinton's political opposition, the FBI has listed
gun owners as part of the domestic terrorism equation. In fact, the report
accuses GOA Executive Director Larry Pratt of helping to "fuel the already
existing paranoia of militia and patriot groups."

Hogwash. If the FBI is serious about not fueling existing paranoia, then it
should stop maintaining files on leading Americans (remember Filegate?), and
come clean on what it knows about Waco. The FBI took six years to discover
they had withheld information about Waco from Congress, including their own
use of pyrotechnic devises and the use of the military the day the Davidians
were burned to death. For more information on this report and GOA's brief
response to it, go to http://www.gunowners.org/fs9904.htm at the GOA
website. You will need Adobe Acrobat to read the report, available from
the FBI at http://www.fbi.gov/library/megiddo/publicmegiddo.pdf

ACTION: Tell your Congressmen that, in contrast to what the FBI is saying,
decent gun owners are not the problem in this country. Let them know that
we don't need gun control; we need government control. Also, make sure they
know that NO compromise gun legislation is acceptable in the juvenile crime
bill (S. 254 / H.R. 1501). You can reach your Senators and Representative
at 202-225-3121 or toll-free at 877-722-7494.

Even the ACLU opposes the bill (albeit for different reasons). They have
established a free Congressional fax service that can be accessed on their
website at http://www.aclu.org/action/juvenile106.html GOA's Auto-Mailer at
http://www.gunowners.org/mailerx.html can be used to send e-mail to Congress.



-



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

From: "Will Thompson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Hatch selling out again!
Date: 13 Nov 1999 20:30:37 -0700


>
> Will not one deliver us from Senator Jerk?
> ------------------------------------------

No....
"We have met the enemy it is us"
WE elected the pig.  WE are responsible for him.
WE must dethrone him.  No one is going to _deliver_
us, we must deliver ourselves, and apologise to
the rest of the country for what we have done.

See below.

**************************


Save the Second Amendment and the Constitution:
Replace US Senator Orrin G. Hatch

Gun Owners of America Political Victory Fund
(A Project of Gun Owners of America)
E-Mail/FAX Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: [phone] / FAX: [phone]
http://www.gunowners.org

Thursday, August 12, 1999


Utah Senator Orrin G. Hatch no longer represents his gun-owning,
freedom loving, and Constitution-minded constituents.  In recent
years, his voting record on firearms issues has moved in the
direction of his close personal friend and colleague, the
ultra-liberal Ted Kennedy!  Most recently Senator Hatch enlisted the
assistance of Senators Kennedy, Schumer, and others to obtain Senate
passage of his S. 254 (the "Juvenile Crime bill").  This legislation
contains several provisions attacking gun owners, including
provisions that would:

   * Restrict or ban safe and lawful firearms use by young persons
and imprison their parents for clerical violations;

   * Ban importation of personal defense ammunition magazines greater
than 10 rounds;

   * Require all gun show attendees to present photo identification
for permanent registration in a BATF log book;

   * Enable future legislation requiring all firearms to be locked
up, preventing their use for self-defense; and,

   * Threaten gun show operators with jail if even one person buys a
gun without the instant background/registration check.  This could
make gun shows a thing of the past.


If You Help, Senator Hatch Can Be Replaced

Senator Hatch must win in next year's elections to continue
"representing" Utah's gun owners.  His greatest vulnerability will
occur on Monday, March 27, at 7 PM.  On this evening delegates for
the County and State Conventions will be elected at neighborhood
caucus meetings throughout the state.  These delegates will
determine the Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate, and almost
certainly Utah's next Senator.  If approximately 2200
pro-Constitution delegates are elected to the State Convention, Utah
will no longer be shamed by the anti-gun advocacy of Orrin Hatch.


What You Must Do Now!

1. Contact one of GOA's volunteer coordinators to identify yourself
as a supporter of the gun owner campaign to replace Orrin Hatch.
Please contact either Arnold Gaunt or Sarah Thompson, preferably via
e-mail, as follows:

Arnold Gaunt
PO Box 1096
Clearfield, UT 84089-1096
[phone]
[e-mail]

Dr. Sarah Thompson
PO Box 1185
Sandy, UT 84091-1185
[phone]
[e-mail]

2. Commit to attend the neighborhood caucus meetings at 7:00 PM on
March 27, 2000, and gain the commitments of family, friends, and
associates to do the same.


**************
Not paid for by any candidate or candidate's committee. Authorized
and paid for by Gun Owners of America Political Victory Fund.

**************
Cheaper Than Dirt donates a percentage of your total order to GOA if
you use http://www.cheaperthandirt.com/goa.htm to enter their online
store.

**************
Did someone else forward this to you? To be certain of getting up to
date information, please consider subscribing to the GOA E-Mail
Alert Network directly. There is no cost or obligation, and the
volume of mail is quite low. To subscribe, simply send a message to
[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: EZ "Extremist" Self-Identity Kit
Date: 14 Nov 1999 07:07:00 -0700


-----

Excerpts from "Propagandizing the Police"
by William Norman Grigg

The New American" November 8, 1999

"John J. Nutter of the Ohio-based Conflict Analysis Group,
presents himself as an "expert" on "right-wing extremism".
He has taught seminars for law enforcement officers in
several states. Nutter describes "right-wing extremism" as a
"lightning rod for the mentally disturbed" and says that it
threatens "assassination, mass murder, and armed uprising."

Nutter lists as "danger signs" of potentially lethal
"extremism" such things as possession of "extremist literature"
(he specifically cites The New American), the display of
"firearms lapel pins, bumper stickers or window decals about
the New World Order, Clinton Communism, 'I fear the government
that fears my gun,'" and the like. Police are also advised to
be wary of citizens who display "excessive concern" over the
federal government's massacre of the Branch Davidians, the
murderous federal assault upon the Randy Weaver family in Idaho,
or similar abuses of power. Of particular concern, insists
Nutter, are "strong proponents of the Second Amendment" who
believe in the "right of individuals to possess 'arms'" and
are "fearful of any limitations on weaponry."

Nor is Nutter the only "expert" advising police officers
regarding such "danger signs." In his book Freedom in Chains,
scholar James Bovard reports: "At a 1997 American Society of
Criminology conference one professor argued that among signs of
'hate group ideology' were 'discussion of the Bill of Rights,
especially the Second Amendment or the Federalist Papers,'
'discussion of military oppression, in the U.S. or elsewhere,'
and 'discussion of the Framers of our Government.'" From that
academic "expert's" perspective, all one needs to do to qualify
as a potential "hate criminal" is to profess a love for our
Constitution.

Kay Stone and Jean Vallance of Alamogordo, New Mexico,
discovered that these expansive definitions are being taken
seriously by some law enforcement officers. As The New American
has previously reported Mrs. Stone and Mrs. Vallance, both of
whom are retired grandmothers, found themselves under scrutiny
by the New Mexico State Police after they had participated in
talk-radio discussions of the United Nations on a local call-in
program. The scrutiny of the two retired grandmothers followed
the publication of a report entitled The Extremist Right: An
Overview, which was compiled by the Criminal Intelligence
Section of the New Mexico Department of Public Safety (DPS).

That report, which was larded with citations from the familiar
pack of left-wing "watchdogs," described the "radical right" as
"a continuum from those who disagree with government but operate
within the law to those who work at nothing less than the
overthrow of government. These groups call themselves 'Patriots.'"
The roster of potential terrorists described in the DPS document
included Klansmen, neo-Nazis, and other practitioners of violence,
as well as "militant abortion foes [and] radical
anti-environmentalists," and others who espouse political
"conspiracy theories."

The anti-"extremist" dragnet cast by the DPS must have been
incredibly vast and tightly knit in order to snag two retired
grandmothers - one of whom, Mrs. Vallance, is married to an
employee at Holloman Air Force Base - as potential terrorists
on the basis of remarks made on a radio call-in program.

Alluding to this incident in New Mexico, Laird Wilcox noted,
"The real danger posed by these 'watchdog' groups is that their
intelligence is taken seriously by police officers, who don't
have the time or resources to examine that information carefully.
Being a policeman is a dangerous job, and when a policeman is
told by a supposedly authoritative source that a given individual
belongs to a potentially violent group, he has to take such
warnings seriously." As a result, Wilcox continued, "routine
traffic stops can become 'incidents' that are good for neither
the police nor the average citizen. Let's say that a guy gets
stopped for speeding and when his name is run through the computer
he's been red-flagged as a 'dangerous' person on the basis of
information fed to the police by some left-wing radical posing as
a 'watchdog.' So instead of merely asking the driver for his
license and other information, the officer now approaches the car
in a defensive posture, ready to draw his gun - not because of
anything the driver did, but because he somehow ended up on a
list compiled by some self-appointed left-wing 'watchdog' group."

"The problem described by Wilcox becomes even graver when it is
understood that in the near future, police and federal authorities
may be using "watchdog"-compiled lists to decide who is, and who
is not, entitled to enjoy the protections offered by the Bill of Rights."

http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/1999/11-08-99/vo15no23_police.htm


-



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

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: FW: Gun Registration & Confiscation Defied 1/4
Date: 15 Nov 1999 14:30:00 -0700


-----

Gun Registration & Confiscation Defied

Why I WILL NOT Obey California's Gun Registration Edict
By Brian Puckett Date: Friday, November 12, 1999 5:51 PM
(Sent directly to the California Governor)

A BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE SITUATION

The Democrat-controlled government of California has recently issued
two edicts, one that bans ownership of SKS rifles with detachable
magazines and requires their surrender to the state, and one that
bans buying, selling, or lending of so-called "assault weapons" and
that requires present owners of such arms to register them. The edicts
take effect January 1, 2000. For all those who have in the past stated
that, "When the state starts confiscating guns, then I'll know it's
time to fight back," that time in California will be January 1, 2000.

Many people oppose registration because it precedes confiscation.
Indeed it does, as those who were foolish enough to register their
SKSs are now discovering. However, that is a practical reason to
oppose registration, not a legal reason. And while avoiding
confiscation is tangentially a moral reason to oppose registration,
neither is it a legal reason. Refusing to obey a law because of what
might happen or what has happened in other cases will not stand up
in court. But there is a reason not to register or turn in any
firearm that is practical, moral, and legal.

TWO QUESTIONS TO ANSWER

As regards the Second Amendment, determining the constitutionality
of the California edicts mentioned above forces the examination of
two basic questions. One, which arms are protected by the Second
Amendment? And two, is registration an "infringement" of the Second
Amendment's right to keep and bear arms? Fortunately, answering these
questions is not a difficult or mysterious task. But they should be
answered thoroughly.

WHAT IS THE BILL OF RIGHTS?

The Bill of Rights is not separate from the Constitution but is an
integral part of it, as are all the other amendments. However, the
Bill of Rights is special in that, like sections of the Declaration
of Independence, it contains many of the core philosophical
underpinnings of our government (especially Amendments 1, 2, 9, and
10). Therefore, it is easily the most important part of the U.S.
Constitution. The rest of the Constitution, along with most of the
remaining Amendments, deals primarily with the mechanics of putting
this philosophy into effect in the form of a republic.

In the original document that we call the Bill of Rights, the Bill's
ten enumerated items are listed as "articles". Those familiar with
the history of the Constitution are aware that these articles were
not afterthoughts, but were crucial elements whose written inclusion
in the Constitution was insisted upon before certain states would
agree to ratification of the preceding text. Because of this, a
powerful case can be made that none of these first ten articles may
be modified or revoked, because that would alter the fundamental
philosophy underlying the Constitution and would violate the
original agreement among the states.

THE PURPOSE AND MEANING OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT

The laws of the pre-U.S. colonies and the writings of the Founders
clearly reveal that they, like all civilized humans, embraced the
personal, common-law right of self-defense and property defense.
The Founders' writings, such as the Federalist Papers, also clearly
reveal their belief that self-defense includes defending oneself
against a government gone bad. In fact the evidence shows that this
latter item is a primary reason they included the Second Amendment
in the Bill of Rights, and the reason for the Second Amendment's
reference to the militia; the "army of citizens" (as opposed to
the regular army).

The Second Amendment specifies the right of the people to keep and
bear arms. If the people are to keep and bear them this must include,
at the very minimum, personal arms, that is, arms that a single
individual may carry and employ. For hundreds of years prior to the
writing of the Constitution, the Western world's most advanced and
cherished personal arm had been the firearm. Furthermore, the firearm
is the sole arm continually singled out in the Founders' writings.
Owning firearms was a right exercised in North America long before
the existence of the United States.

TO MEAN ANYTHING, RIGHTS MUST INCLUDE ASSOCIATED NECESSITIES

For any given right, it is meaningless to affirm that right if
the tools or necessities of effecting that right are prohibited.
Consider our Bill of Rights:

It is meaningless to affirm the First Amendment's right to free
exercise of religion if people are prohibited from owning Bibles,
Korans, or Torahs.

It is meaningless to affirm the First Amendment's "freedom of
the press" if people are prohibited from owning printing presses
(or today's electronic methods of mass communication).

It is meaningless to affirm the Third Amendment's right to refuse
to lodge a soldier in one's home, or the Fourth Amendment's right
to be secure in one's home, if people are prohibited from owning
their own home.

It is meaningless to affirm the Sixth Amendment's right to defense
counsel if people are prohibited from using their own or public
money to pay for an attorney's services.

And it is beyond meaningless; it is absolutely absurd; to affirm the
Second Amendment's right to keep and bear arms if people are prohibited
from owning arms. Applying the above-mentioned general principle of
rights to the Second Amendment, it would be correct to state that
it is meaningless to affirm the right to self-defense if people are
prohibited from owning the tools or necessities of self-defense.

For example, consider elderly people, women, the physically handicapped,
small-statured men, or anyone who is not a master of unarmed combat
being faced with a large, or muscular, or armed assailant, or multiple
assailants. It happens every day in this country. It is absurd, illogical,
illegal, and inhumane to uphold their right to self-defense while
prohibiting them from owning the most portable, easy to use, proven,
and inexpensive of instantly effective self-defense tools: guns.

WHICH ARMS ARE PROTECTED BY THE SECOND AMENDMENT?

Along with "the people", the Second Amendment specifically mentions
the militia, consisting of armed citizens not enlisted in any regular
military corps: the "citizen army". The militia's purpose is, as its
name implies, a military one. The militia was, and still may be, pitted
against other military forces. That was true in pre-U.S. North America,
it was true during the Revolutionary War, and it is true today.

If the militia may be pitted against regular soldiers, whether of a
foreign invader or of a tyrannical domestic government, then it follows
automatically that at a minimum the citizens comprising the militia must
possess personal arms (as opposed to large or crew-served arms like
cannon) equal to those of the opposing soldiers. Equal personal arms
means, of course, those that include all design features, capabilities,
and ergonomics that make a military firearm suitable for modern battle.
If this is not the case then there is no point in having a militia, as
it will not pose an effective fighting force. For example, the extreme
inadequacy of bolt action rifles in combat against semiautomatic arms
is well known. But the Founders' firm insistence upon having an
effective militia is absolutely clear from their numerous writings
on the subject and from the existence of the Second Amendment itself.

That being so, military-pattern firearms are obviously protected
by the Second Amendment.
[ Continued In Next Message... ]


-



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

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: FW: Gun Registration & Confiscation Defied 2/4
Date: 15 Nov 1999 14:30:00 -0700


[ ...Continued From Previous Message ]
Therefore any restrictive legislation on military-pattern firearms,
or on military design elements of other firearms, is completely
contrary to the word and spirit of the Second Amendment and is
therefore flatly unconstitutional. [U.S. v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174
(1939) completely supports this.]

REGISTRATION IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH RIGHTS

Consider the situation if a state declared that it was perfectly
legal to own a Bible, or a copy of the Koran or the Talmud, but that
you had to register it in order to keep and use it. Now, what if you
did not register it; would you lose the right to own and read it? Of
course not. The very idea is absurd. Under the laws of this nation you
have the right to worship as you please. As we have seen, that right
automatically includes articles necessary or associated with the right,
such as books, crucifixes, stars of David, yarmulkes, and so forth.

In exactly the same way, if the state suddenly required registration
of printing presses, would the owner of a press lose his right to
own or use it by not filling out a registration form? Of course not.
The right would still exist. No piece of paper affects it.

In exactly the same way, one does not have to register one's vocal
cords, bullhorn, typewriter, pens, pencils, computers, movie cameras,
etc, to exercise the right of free speech (or stated in modern terms,
the right of uncensored communication). Under the Constitution, if a
state issued an edict demanding registration of such things that rule
would be invalid as law. Your right to use them would still exist,
completely unaffected.

In exactly the same way, prior registration of one's body, home,
address, papers, possessions, etc, is not necessary in order to enjoy
the Constitutional right to protection from unreasonable searches and
seizures of one's person, house, papers, and effects. These various
physical things are automatically included, automatically protected
by the right.

In exactly the same way, one does not have to register anything or
fill out any forms in order to have the Constitutional right to a
speedy public trial. It is automatic.

Now consider the situation if you do not register a gun. Is the
Second Amendment somehow instantly suspended? Did it vanish? Do
you somehow lose the right to keep and bear arms? Certainly not.

If you can lose a "right" by not filling out a piece of paper, then
it is not a right. It is a privilege granted by the government, which
is a different thing altogether. In the area of government, a privilege
is a special permission or immunity granted by a government, it is
generally related to the use of some public facility (such as driving
on the streets, or using the public library) and it may be suspended
or revoked even for minor infractions or misdemeanors.

In sum: Rights do not require government registration, certification,
or approval, and are not subject to any form of taxation. Otherwise
they are not rights, they are privileges granted at the discretion of
the government, controlled by the government, and revocable by the
government.

REGISTRATION IS MORE THAN AN INFRINGEMENT

The Second Amendment reads. "A well-regulated militia, being necessary
to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and
bear arms, shall not be infringed." The question may be asked, "Is
registration of a particular gun truly such a burden that it can be
called an infringement of the right to keep and bear arms?"

To begin with, if we were speaking of registering religious items or
communications devices, none but socialists would dare ask such a
question. Yet the Second Amendment directly follows the amendment
concerned with the free exercise of religion and freedom of the press.
The Second Amendment holds a place of priority in the Bill of Rights,
which is primarily a list of inalienable personal rights.

But to answer the above question: Yes. Registration is absolutely an
infringement, on at least three grounds. In fact, we will see that the
rights versus privileges issue makes registration far more than a mere
infringement.

Information. Registration of a firearm gives the government information
that can be used (and has been used, and is being used right now) to
confiscate that firearm or to pinpoint its owner for weapon seizure,
fining, incarceration, or execution. Having the government in possession
of this information is directly contrary to the Second Amendment's
intent to ensure that citizens always possess the means to overthrow
the government should it become corrupt or tyrannical.

Government control. Allowing the government to seize a citizen's
firearm, or to suspend, revoke, or diminish a citizen's ability to
defend life, family, property, and country for paperwork omissions
or errors, for regulatory violations, for minor infractions of the
law, for misdemeanors, or arguably for anything less than conviction
for a major crime of violence is also directly contrary to the intent
of the Second Amendment. This is because virtually all citizens have
committed, or will commit, one or more of the listed non-violent
errors listed above, whereas the entire point of the Second Amendment
is to place this same citizenry's right to keep and bear arms (and
therefore the right of self-defense) out of the government's grasp.

RIGHT VERSUS PRIVILEGE. Critically relevant to all our rights, is
that any edict that attempts to convert a right into a state-granted
privilege by imposing prior requirements; such as registration;
before it may be exercised goes far beyond mere "infringement" of
that right; it becomes an attempt at outright abrogation of the right.

Therefore the state's demand to comply with the requirements of such
an edict, no matter how physically easy compliance is, imposes not
some mere inconvenience on the individual. It imposes the enormous
moral, ethical, intellectual, and spiritual burden of denying the
existence of the right.

It does not matter if the state demands that one simply tap one's
nose five times in succession in order to be able to keep and bear a
particular gun. This would still be a state-mandated prior requirement.
Compliance would indicate tacit denial of the validity of the Second
Amendment, and denial of the right it protects. Compliance would
encompass an implicit acceptance of the right as a mere privilege,
which is directly contrary to both the letter and spirit of the Second
Amendment.

APPLYING THESE CONCEPTS TO CALIFORNIA'S EDICT

The argument against registration of, and restrictions on,
military-style firearms may be approached by two logical paths
that reach the same conclusions:

1. If the supreme law of the nation protects a personal right to keep
and bear arms (which it does) then the failure to comply with a state
mandate to fill out some registration form cannot revoke this, or any
other, right. If the right to keep and bear arms cannot be revoked (and
it cannot be), then the right to keep and bear militia arms, which are
the very arms implicitly referred to in the Founders' writings and in
the Second Amendment itself, cannot be revoked. If the right to keep
and bear militia arms cannot be revoked (and it cannot be) then we may
own and use any military-pattern individually portable firearm, all of
which are practical militia arms. If that is the case (and it is),
then any restrictive legislation based on militarily useful design
elements of such firearms is flatly unconstitutional.

2. If the supreme law of the nation protects the personal right to keep
and bear arms (which it does), then the right to keep and bear militia
arms, which are the very arms implicitly referred to in the Founders'
writings and in the Second Amendment itself, certainly exists. If that
[ Continued In Next Message... ]


-



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

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: FW: Gun Registration & Confiscation Defied 3/4
Date: 15 Nov 1999 14:30:00 -0700


[ ...Continued From Previous Message ]
is the case (and it is), then we may own and use any military-pattern
individually portable firearm, because all are practical militia arms.
If that is the case (and it is), any restrictive legislation based on
the militarily useful design elements of such firearms is flatly
unconstitutional. If that is the case (and it is), then the failure
to comply with a state mandate to fill out some registration form
cannot revoke this right.

Again, the same situation prevails with all the personal rights in
the Bill of Rights. That is, no state mandate requiring registration,
either of oneself or of things directly associated with a right, can
be a prerequisite or condition of exercising a right, nor can it
affect that right in any way. If it does, then the right has been
unconstitutionally declared a state-controlled privilege.

SUMMARY

As we see from the above, no American can be legally compelled to
register any militarily useful individual arm. That includes pistols,
revolvers, carbines, semi-autos, military-style guns, hunting guns,
self-defense guns, pump guns, lever guns, bolt guns, black powder
guns, scoped guns, .50 caliber guns, .338 caliber guns, .30 caliber
guns, .223 caliber guns, etc. All have been used, or are being used,
as individual military arms, and therefore are implicitly referred
to by the Second Amendment's militia clause.

Moreover, no American can be legally compelled to register any firearm
of common design or function because the Second Amendment does not
protect only guns that are useful in military affairs; it protects all
guns. The militia reference is clearly meant as one important reason
for protecting the right which follows: the right of the people to
keep and bear arms. The Second Amendment says simply "arms", which
imposes no quantity or design limits. It says "bear", which in its
narrowest sense would still include all firearms capable of being
carried and used by one person.

Therefore, under the supreme law of the land, the right to own one or
several of any type of individually portable firearm exists permanently,
inherently, automatically, without prior approval or conditions.

RELATED ISSUES

1. The single debatable exception to the above would be fully
automatic firearms having reasonable restrictions, but not an
outright ban, placed upon them. Being a highly specific, highly
moot case, this subject will not and need not be, addressed here.

2. All indiscriminate weapons; those whose effects are difficult to
direct upon, or confine to, a discrete target (such as flamethrowers,
fragmentation bombs, chemical and biological weapons, mortars) etc.;
are arguably excludable from the protection of the Second Amendment
as posing an unreasonable danger to friend and foe alike.

But absolutely no individually portable firearm of common design or
function may be determined to pose such an unreasonable danger. This
is because a ban on such a firearm could "logically" be extended to
all other firearms of similar design and function (exactly what is
occurring with California's SKS edict now), which would completely
vitiate the Second Amendment. Thus, the 1994 Federal "assault weapon"
ban and magazine capacity limit are both completely unconstitutional.

3. The issue of a firearms seller determining the legal status of a
potential buyer is separable from the issue of registration, and need
not be dealt with here. Suffice it to say that the primary legal
principle involved is declaring it a crime to sell or give a firearm
to anyone who is legally, that is, legal in accordance with Constitution,
prohibited from owning a firearm. Registration need not be, and may not
Constitutionally be, part of any firearm sale or transfer.

REGISTRATION--YOUR DECISION AFFECTS ALL RIGHTS

If a military pattern firearm, the firearm most suited to the militia
mentioned in the Second Amendment, is not protected by the clear
wording of the Second Amendment, then there is no meaning to the
Second Amendment. If there is no meaning to the Second Amendment,
there is no reason to infer meaning in the rest of the Bill of Rights.

If converting the Second Amendment into a privilege by means of a
registration edict is not the maximum "infringement" of that right,
then nothing is.

If converting the Second Amendment into a privilege by means of an
edict is possible, then it is possible to do so for any other right.

Therefore, regarding the Second Amendment, refusing registration
affirms the right to own a militia firearm. It affirms the right to
keep and bear all personal arms. It affirms the validity of the rest
of the Bill of Rights. It affirms that attempting to convert the
Second Amendment into a privilege is the maximum infringement of
that right. It rejects a state's power to convert any right into
a privilege. And lastly it affirms the validity of the Constitution,
and the rule of law, not men.

DEMANDING OR COMPLYING WITH REGISTRATION IS BETRAYAL

Article VI of the Constitution designates the Constitution as the
supreme law of the United States, and specifically states that it
prevails over all state constitutions and statutes. Further, Article VI
requires all legislative, executive, and judicial officers of the U.S.
government and of the state governments to take an oath to obey the
Constitution. Some of these officials may hate firearms and the power
they give to the citizenry, but that is irrelevant. They must treat
the Second Amendment as they would the rest of our Bill of Rights.

All state officials; judges, representatives, and law enforcement
officials; know these facts, but many are corrupt and ignore them.
Their sworn word means nothing to them, nor does the Constitution,
nor do the rights of the constituents for whom they work unless it
suits their own political agenda. It is against this conscienceless
species of human that decent Americans must continually fight, in
California and in the rest of the United States.

If you believe you have the right to keep and bear proper militia arms
in order to defend yourself, your family, your home, and your country,
and if you believe this right is recognized in the Bill of Rights,
then you cannot register or turn in any firearm whatsoever. You may
rationalize it any way you wish, but if you register a firearm you are
implicitly agreeing with the proposition that your right to own that
firearm is nonexistent, and that such ownership is dependent upon
permission from the government. Registration equals betrayal of yourself,
your family, your ancestors, your birthright, your country, and your
Constitution. Period.

A PERSONAL POSITION

Every new illegal gun control edict issued, and every day that existing
illegal gun control edicts continue to be enforced, brings inexhorably
closer the time when firearms owners will train their guns on the
politicians, judges, and other officials who have misled the rest of
the public into giving up their sacred and ancient rights. A desire
to avoid this terrible tragedy motivates my own actions regarding the
Second Amendment and the rights it protects.

For nearly twenty years I have legally owned a militia rifle possessing
the characteristics of the socialists' so-called "assault weapon".
Now my right to own this arm, a right that has existed far longer
than the two centuries-plus that this nation has existed, is suddenly
being challenged by corrupt politicians. But I vehemently reject any
infringement of my rights. I will never register this or any other
firearm. Nor will I ever turn it in, nor will I ever alter any
characteristic or attachment to it. I will never again concern myself
with legislation about pistol grips, bayonet lugs, high-capacity
magazines, flash suppressors, threaded barrels, folding
[ Continued In Next Message... ]


-



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

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: FW: Gun Registration & Confiscation Defied 4/4
Date: 15 Nov 1999 14:30:00 -0700


[ ...Continued From Previous Message ]
stocks, pre-or post-ban manufacture, or any other irrelevant detail
of my firearms.

I will certainly not do as the NRA Members Councils suggest on their
internet site, which is to saw off the pistol grip of one's AR-style
rifle to make it "legal". Understand this: in America it is already
legal. I sometimes wonder whether the socialists will issue an edict
requiring all firearms to have a pink ribbon tied to the barrel,
just to get a belly laugh as the panicked descendants of once-proud
American patriots scurry to comply.

California's current governor, attorney general, and legislators who
voted for these edicts can undoubtedly find thugs as corrupt and anti-
American as themselves to send to my home. I vow not to physically
interfere with their illegal activities, because I wish to see this
matter in court. I hope that other men and women will join me in this
public declaration of civil disobedience, because it would be best to
have ten thousand civil disobedience cases in court, not just mine.
But I understand why, in this day and age of brutal, ethics-free
"public servants"; citizens are reluctant to make themselves a target
of the state. Fortunately, the citizens of California and other states
demanding registration can strike a powerful blow for humanity simply
by refusing to comply.

SEIZE THIS OPPORTUNITY

To those of you who whine, complain, and talk, talk, talk about your
loss of freedom: I say now is the time to do something. There are
few times in an average man's life when the occasion presents itself
to take part in history. Here and now is such a time. This refusal
to submit to tyranny is not simply about firearms. It is about human
rights, it is about the rule of law, and it is about the continuance
of this great nation. To what better use will you ever put your life
than to stand up for these things? Will you look back on this moment
and say, "I wish I had done something", or will you step forward and
seize this chance?

With the government having grown so powerful and corrupt, defying it
is frightening. It is especially frightening because many Americans
seem fairly content right now. But the feelings of the apathetic mass
are irrelevant. They have never figured in history, and never will.
The apathetic mass will go along with whatever system exists. It is
the freedom-loving individual who, although part of a much smaller
group, has guided every free nation toward the light.

Freedom is not maintained without taking risks and making sacrifices,
without fighting for it. This has always been true, throughout history.
If you are afraid to take a stand against this tyrannical government,
if you excuse yourself by saying you must "take care of my family
first", I say thank God there were men in the past who understood
the priority of freedom.

Look at your children. Is it more important that they have an
uninterrupted flow of plastic toys and the soft luxuries of modern
American life, or that they grow up as free men and women, with all
inherent rights and responsibilities? I say any man who does nothing
while even a single basic freedom he has enjoyed is stripped from
his offspring; a freedom secured by the blood of others; deserves
no offspring.

As I said, I will turn in no firearms, ever. I will register no
firearms, ever. My right to own and use firearms predates the
Constitution. It existed before the corrupt socialists in Washington
and Sacramento came to office, and it will exist forever afterward.
The Second Amendment simply recognizes this right. I do not know where
my civil disobedience will lead, but I am certain where the slavishness
and cowardice of compliance will lead. I refuse to take part in this
foul business of registration. I hope that you refuse also. If we
stand together we will set fires of freedom burning across America.

Mr. Puckett is a free-lance writer whose past work includes articles
on U.S. foreign, domestic, and military policy for the Houston Post.
His firearms and Second Amendment articles have appeared in the
magazines Handguns, Combat Handguns, Guns and Ammo, SWAT, Police, and
numerous other publications. He is the author of the essay "A Plan to
Restore the Second Amendment", appearing in an upcoming issue of
Handguns Magazine. He is a co-founder of the gun rights resource and
media action organizations GunTruths http://www.guntruths.com and
Citizens Of America http://www.citizensofamerica.org. Mr. Puckett
believes that much of the annual slaughter of Americans by criminals
can be blamed directly on those who advocate gun control, and that any
politician who advocates gun control neither trusts his constituents
nor cares about their lives or property. The above statement/essay is
an expression of his opinions alone. He may be contacted regarding
this article at [e-mail]. Put the word RESISTER in the
subject line.

The above essay, which includes the biographical note, may be
reproduced in any medium provided it is reproduced in full. A copy has
been sent via email and regular mail to the governor of California.
Feel free to forward it to all gun rights activists and lists.

****************************
FEDERAL LEVER
The Juvenile Justice Bill (Senate Bill S254) contains provisions to
track private sales at gun shows, producing records that can be used
against you in the future.

It is a registration of sale of a firearm. Registration is the one
thing that makes confiscation possible. Anti-gun politicians can only
steal guns if they have a record of firearms ownership. GET BETWEEN
THESE RECORDS AND YOUR GOVERNMENTS ANY WAY YOU CAN.

Call your Congressman and Senators, and the offices of these so-called
Republican leaders, and complain. Defeat the anti-gun provisions,
including the "registration" of sales, in the Juvenile Justice Bill.

You can call your two Senators at [phone] and your
Representative at [phone] at the Capitol Switchboard.
Here is the URL for Congressional Telephone Directory:
http://clerkweb.house.gov/106/mbrcmtee/members/teledir/members/cdframe.htm
Here's an e-mail link to Congress. http://in-search-of.org/
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/
http://www.gunowners.org/mailerx.html
For legislative updates contact http://www.nealknox.com and go
to "Scripts from the Firearms COAlition Legislative Update Line"

-Weldon Clark

****************************

The 2ndAmendmentNews Team

The way to protect your own rights is to protect the rights of others.
Our right to own and use firearms is under attack. This list was
created in a hurry due to the emergency presented by anti-gun
politicians and the media dancing in the blood of those who died in
the Colorado massacre.

To join please send E-MAil to [e-mail] with the
following text in the message body:

subscribe 2nd-Amendment-News email@address

To send a message to the list administrator, send E-mail to
[e-mail]

Also, feel free to forward our alerts.

If you've received this as a forward and wish to subscribe
please send a reply to me at [e-mail]

Cordially Yours,
The 2ndAmendmentNews Team

2ndAmendmentNews is published by volunteer activists who support the
full original individual rights intent of the 2nd Amendment and oppose
any appeasement on gun rights. The moderators include Chris Behanna,
Weldon Clark (an NRA director) and Steve Cicero.

If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude
better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace.
We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which
feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity
forget that ye were our countrymen. -- Samuel Adams, speech at the
Philadelphia State House, August 1, 1776.


-



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

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: Interim - Capital
Date: 16 Nov 1999 15:23:00 -0700


-----

For those not aware of it:

Judiciary Interim Committee is going to cover "Weapons Restrictions
Amendments".  First item on agenda.
Wed Nov 17, 2:00 PM Room 403 State Capital

AND

The Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Interim Committee is going to
deliver the "Performance Audit Report - Asset Forfeiture Procedures"
and after that they will cover "Forfeiture Relating to Sexual Offenses
Against Children".  These are items 7&8 in the Meeting starting at
2:15 pm Room 416 State Capital.

eGroups.com Home: http://www.egroups.com/group/gopconservatives/


-



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

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: FW: GOUtah! Political Alert #33 - 17 November 1999
Date: 18 Nov 1999 11:01:00 -0700


GOUtah!
Gun Owners of Utah

Utah's Uncompromising, Independent Gun Rights Network.
No Compromise. No Retreat. No Surrender. Not Now. Not Ever.

Visit our website at http://www.slpsa.org/goutah!

GOUtah! Political Alert #33 - 17 November 1999

Today's Voice of Liberty:

"It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones."
-- Calvin Coolidge

If you wish to be added to the GOUtah! list, please log onto our website
at http://www.slpsa.org/goutah! or send an e-mail to [e-mail]
or send a fax to [phone] asking to be added to the GOUtah! list.
If you wish to forward or share this copyrighted information with others,
you are welcome to do so, on the condition that you pass along the entire
document intact [I would if they'd hold it under 8K - Scott] and unmodified,
and that GOUtah! is clearly indicated as the original source of the
material, unless otherwise noted.

GOUtah! Only Utah-based Gun Rights Group Offering Testimony Opposing
Proposed Misdemeanor Gun Ban

GOUtah! was the only Utah-based gun rights group to offer both written and
oral testimony against a proposed gun ownership, possession and purchase
prohibition bill being considered before the Interim Judiciary Committee at
the Utah State Capitol on November 17th. While a representative of Utah's
'other' major gun rights organization was in attendance, he offered no
public comment whatsoever on the draconian anti-gun proposal.

Brian Judy, the NRA/ILA's Utah State Liaison also offered written testimony
against the bill, and requested that GOUtah! duplicate and distribute his
comments to committee members along with GOUtah's! testimony. GOUtah! also
provided KSL-TV with an on-camera interview and written materials to
several other print journalists.

The proposed bill creates a long laundry list of misdemeanor offenses, any
conviction for which an individual could be denied ownership, possession or
purchase of a firearm for a designated period of time. GOUtah! opposes any
loss or abridgment of any civil right, for any period, absent a
felony-level conviction.

The bill is sponsored by committee co-chair Sen. Terry Spencer, and passed
out of committee with a favorable recommendation.

Only one dissenting vote, supporting the GOUtah! and NRA/ILA positions,
came from committee member Rep. Chad Bennion (R-SL Co.) Phone (801)
281-1607, [phone].

Voting against the interests of Utah gun owners, and in favor of passing
the bill out of committee were:

Rep. Gary Cox (D-SL Co.) Phone [phone]
Rep. Lamont Tyler (R-SL Co.) Phone [phone]
Rep. Neal Hendrickson (D-SL Co.) Phone [phone]
Rep. Patricia Arent (D-SL Co.) Phone [phone]
Rep. Afton Bradshaw (R-SL Co.) Phone [phone]
Rep. LaWanna Shurtliff (D-Weber Co.) Phone [phone]
Sen. Pete Suazo (D-SL Co.) Phone [phone]
Sen. Lyle Hillyard (R-Cache Co.) Phone [phone]
Sen. David Steele (R-Davis Co.) Phone [phone]
Sen. Terry Spencer (R-Davis Co.) Phone [phone]

Most notable by their absence when the critical committee vote was taken were:

Rep. Dave Ure (R-Summit Co.) Phone [phone]
Rep. John Swallow (R-SL Co.) Phone [phone]
Rep. Greg Curtis (R-SL Co.) Phone [phone]
Rep. Bill Hickman (R-Washington Co.) Phone [phone]
Rep. Kathy Bryson (R-Utah Co.) Phone [phone]

GOUtah! suggests if you have concerns about this legislation, you contact
these elected leaders today and share your feelings about this proposal.
Always remember to be polite and to the point when communicating with your
elected officials.

GOUtah's! written committee testimony follows:

GOUtah! Public Policy Position Paper - 17 November 1999

Violent Misdemeanor Convictions, Plea Bargaining and the
Loss of Firearm Ownership, Purchase or Possession Rights

As a broad-based network of responsible and law abiding firearms owners in
Utah, we too share the concern of the general public and elected officials
about the effects of violent crime in our society. We are also concerned
about the potential loss of critical, individual constitutional rights
based on any misdemeanor conviction.

Our nation's long traditions of both Common and Constitutional laws have
drawn a clear and unambiguous line between misdemeanor-level and
felony-level behavior as the threshold for loss of any individual, civil
and constitutional rights. It is GOUtah's! clear and unambiguous position
that under no circumstances should a misdemeanor conviction be used as the
basis for the loss of any civil rights, either temporary or permanent,
including the right to own, purchase, posses or use a firearm for any
lawful purpose. Only upon a felony conviction should the loss of civil
rights, including firearms ownership, holding public office, or any other
right be abridged, limited or suspended.

If you, the elected leaders of our state, feel that the conviction in a
court of law of any specific type or level of juvenile or adult behavior
should qualify an individual for the loss of any civil right, including
firearms ownership or possession, on either a temporary or permanent basis,
then that activity should be unambiguously defined in statute as
felony-level criminal behavior and treated accordingly by the Utah criminal
justice system. If jaywalking, littering, or spitting on a public sidewalk
is a real and present threat to our society, make it a felony. Upon any
such a felony conviction, the individual in question forfeits the right to
own or possess any type of dangerous weapon, be it a firearm or any other
similar implement, along with many other rights and protections.

GOUtah! also believes that the practice of plea bargaining for any crime of
violence, felony or misdemeanor, regardless if any weapon is involved,
should be halted immediately. If the evidence exists to file charges and
prosecute on a felony-level crime, then do so, and let the accused have
their day in court. Justice on the 'cheap and dirty' is not real justice.
However, it does indeed 'cheapen and defile' our basic sense of justice and
the respect of every citizen for our legal system. Let's have real justice
for a change, rather than just playing 'let's make a deal.'

SNIP

GOUtah! Helps Utah CCW and Self-Defense Instructors
Create Information Network and Support Group.

GOUtah! is cooperating with CCW instructor Clark Aposhian to help create
the Utah Self-Defense Instructors Network to promote safe, professional and
accessible self-defense training for all Utah gun owners. GOUtah! will
offer all US-DIN members free subscriptions to the GOUtah! information
network and offers to function as the legislative and public policy
analysis arm of the new group.

A US-DIN mission statement has been drafted, along with a voluntary code of
professional standards for CCW instruction. An organizational meeting is
scheduled for 7:00PM on Tuesday, Nov. 23rd at Custom Arms, 4075 West 4715
South, Kearns, Utah, [phone].

Please contact Mr. Aposhian directly to get involved in this activity. Mr.
Aposhian can be reached at PO Box 71677, SLC, UT 84171, [phone], or
you can send e-mail to [e-mail] for more information.

This concludes the GOUtah! Political and Legislative Alert #33 - 17
November 1999. We hope this information will be of assistance to you in
defending your firearms rights. Remember that getting this information is
meaningless unless YOU ACT ON IT TODAY. If you just read it and dump it in
the trash, your gun rights, and the gun rights of future generations go in
the trash with it. Get involved, get active and get vocal!

Copyright 1999 by GOUtah! All rights reserved.


-



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

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: FW: Mandatory Gun Law A Proven Success
Date: 19 Nov 1999 14:50:00 -0700


Please do not construe my forwarding of this as condoning brandishing.

Scott

-----

Mandatory Gun Law A Proven Success
Why Doesn't The Media Visit Kennesaw?

By Chuck Baldwin
11-6-99

The New American magazine reminds us that March 25th marked the 16th
anniversary of Kennesaw, Georgia's ordinance requiring heads of households
(with certain exceptions) to keep at least one firearm in their homes.

The city's population grew from around 5,000 in 1980 to 13,000 by 1996
(latest available estimate). Yet there have been only three murders: two
with knives (1984 and 1987) and one with a firearm (1997).

"After the law went into effect in 1982, crime against persons plummeted 74
percent compared to 1981, and fell another 45 percent in 1983 compared to
1982. And it has stayed impressively low. In addition to nearly
non-existent homicide (murders have averaged a mere 0.19 per year), the
annual number of armed robberies, residential burglaries, commercial
burglaries, and rapes have averaged, respectively, 1.69, 31.63, 19.75, and
2.00 through 1998."

With all the attention that has been heaped upon the lawful possession of
firearms lately, you would think that a city that requires gun ownership
would be the center of a media feeding frenzy. It isn't. The fact is I
can't remember a major media outlet even mentioning Kennesaw. Can you?
The reason is obvious. Kennesaw proves that the presence of firearms
actually improves safety and security. This is not the message that the
media want us to hear. They want us to believe that guns are evil and are
the cause of violence. The facts tell a different story.

What is even more interesting about Kennesaw is that the city's crime rate
decreased with the simple knowledge that the entire community was armed.
The bad guys didn't force the residents to prove it. Just knowing that
residents were armed prompted them to move on to easier targets. Most
criminals don't have a death wish. There have been two occasions in my own
family when the presence of a handgun averted potential disaster. In both
instances the gun was never aimed at a person and no shot was fired. Yet,
in both cases the thugs bent on criminal mischief decided to take their
ambitions elsewhere and my family remained safe. Only God knows what would
have happened if a firearm had not been handy.

Yes, there are times when gun accidents occur. There are many more
accidents involving automobiles, airplanes, bathroom shower stalls and
backyard swimming pools, however. And let's not forget that freedom is
risky business.  Freedom allows people to make mistakes recognizing that
the alternative is worse.

A local newspaper columnist recently said that other nations are free
without possessing firearms. He fails to see the obvious fact that people
who are not free to own firearms are not free. Many people live their
entire lives and never know a day of real freedom. And, while I'm sure that
there are those who would choose to live without freedom, there are some of
us who would rather die free than live enslaved.


-



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

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: FW: Gun Injury Researcher at CDC Fired
Date: 19 Nov 1999 14:50:00 -0700


-----

I'm not sure of the source, but this is good news, if true.

----------

Gun Injury Researcher at CDC Fired
11/16/99

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) quietly fired
Mark L. Rosenberg, its top gun violence researcher, on Sept. 1, the Probe
newsletter reported Nov. 1.

Rosenberg, who was fired by CDC Director Jeffrey P. Koplan, M.D., initiated
CDC's research into gun violence in the early 1980s, looking particularly
at the causes and prevention of gun violence.

"Mark has been a giant on the world scene in saying that the peril of gun
injury is a public health issue that can be approached like any other such
issue, by doing research, designing interventions, and then modifying them
if necessary," said Rebecca Peters of Australia, an attorney and a gun
control advocate who is a visiting fellow in justice studies at the Soros
Foundation in New York.

She added, "There is a widespread perception among the public health
community that the reason Rosenberg was so unceremoniously dumped is because
he's been identified by the gun lobby as their enemy. I don't think this
ouster is a coincidence, given the upcoming presidential election."

The CDC's gun violence work has been strongly opposed by Republicans in
the U.S. Senate. In 1995, the U.S. Congress cut the CDC's budget by $2.6
million, the exact amount the center requested for research on gun-related
injuries. Among the senators who attacked the gun study program were Bob
Dole (R-Kan.), Trent Lott (R-Miss.), Christopher Bond (R-Mo.), Ted Stevens
(R-Ala.), and Lauch Faircloth (R-N.C).

The program also was opposed by the National Rifle Association (NRA).
According to Peters and other experts, the firing of Rosenberg means the
NRA/GOP agenda to stop or curtail research on gun-related injuries has
been achieved.

According to CDC spokeswoman Mary Ann Fenley, the remaining budget for
limited research and analysis into gun violence provided by the U.S.
Congress is $1 million annually. The cuts come at a time when gun violence
at schools, in the workplace and in communities has increased.

[Dexter note: This is not true. Violence in schools, especially deaths,
is actually decreasing, but the exceptions are headline-grabbers.]

Rosenberg is now working in a non-federal job at a collaborative center for
childhood well-being that is run by Emory University and the Carter Center
near Atlanta, Ga. He also retains his U.S. Public Health Service title of
assistant surgeon general.

Fenley said the center's new chief and acting director is family
practitioner Stephen B. Thacker, M.D. It appears Thacker has little
experience in gun violence studies.


-



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

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: FW: No Rise in Workplace Violence
Date: 19 Nov 1999 14:50:00 -0700


-----


An excerpt from the "Daily Labor Report" on workplace violence (quoting
the Washington Post).  William Weber, quoted below, is one of the senior
executives at BLS.  The data presented is from my department.  "It's
more the high-visibility and shocking nature of the incidents," Weber
says, "rather than the numbers, that are driving all the concern."

I beg to differ.  If I were quoted in the Post (and this is why I'm
not!), the quote would read something more like this:  "It's more the
Unconstitutional gun-grabbing, media-sensationalizing nature of the
incidents, rather than the reality of the situation, that are driving
all the concern."

I've done the math on "going postal": You're twice as likely to be struck by
lightning than you are killed by a coworker.  (It's a misleading statistic,
and it's comparing apples and oranges, but that hasn't stopped anyone else!)

Workplace homicides were 1,044 in 1992; peaked at 1,080 in 1994; have
declined ever since to 709 in 1998.  Not all were gun related, and the
majority were robberies, not coworker tirades.

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

"Going Postal" hits the private sector, and tensions are rising across a
spectrum of workplaces, says an article by Rene Sanchez in the Washington
Post (Nov. 7, page A3). ...  Yet for all the growing alarm over bloody
sprees in the workplace, they remain rare.  In fact, there is evidence
that they are not soaring in number every year, contrary to perceptions.

Homicide is the second-leading cause of workplace death in the nation, but
it's at its lowest point in seven years, according to BLS.  In 1998, 709
people were slain on the job, down from 860 the previous year.  Most of the
killings occurred during store robberies.  A closer look at the government
statistics shows that the number of deadly assaults in the workplace by
enraged co-workers, customers, or clients is a much lower and fairly stable
figure.

Last year, BLS recorded 98 such killings nationwide, 17 more than the
previous year, yet almost on par with the annual average from the past
six years of 105 victims. ...  "These types of incidents still account
for only about 10 percent of workplace homicides," said William Weber,
the BLS assistant commissioner of safety, health and working conditions.
"It's more the high-visibility and shocking nature of the incidents,
rather than the  numbers, that are driving all the concern."  But homicide
totals do not tell the full story of how tense workplaces across the
country seem to be getting. There were also hundreds of nonfatal shootings
and stabbings of workers on the job last year and more than 8,000 serious
assaults, according to labor statistics. ...



-



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

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: FW: Utah Shooting Sports Council E-mail Action Alert
Date: 19 Nov 1999 14:50:00 -0700


----------

Utah Shooting Sports Council E-mail Action Alert

The Utah Shooting Sports Council is looking for volunteers to help
distribute literature at the November 20th and 21st Crossroads of the West
gun show being held at the Salt Palace. In exchange for helping you will
receive free admission to the show. You do not need to be a USSC member to
volunteer.

The upcoming Utah legislative session is going to be a difficult one.  In
addition to fighting the usual assaults on law abiding gun owners, we are
going to be promoting a number of pro gun bills.  Even though the Utah
legislature has been very supportive of gun owners in the past we cannot
assume that this will continue in the future.  The anti-gun zealots have
been very active this past year trying to scare everyone into believing that
you and other gun owners are responsible for the Columbine tragedy. Our most
effective means to counter the gun control fanatics is to have thousands of
gun owners contacting legislators during the upcoming session. To understand
the impact that phone calls have on lawmakers, consider Representative Marty
Stephens comments that appeared in the July 22, 1999 Salt Lake Tribune.  The
article concerned the legislatures refusal to go along with Governor Mike
Leavitt's call for a special legislative session to pass more gun control
laws.

"Despite numerous public-opinion polls showing a large majority of Utahns
support gun-control measures, including barring legally concealed weapons
from public schools, Republican legislators are skeptical. "That's not what
the people in our districts are telling us", said Stephens. "Instead,
residents oppose a special session on gun control by a 30-1 margin", he
added.

Our best method of mobilizing gun owners is to have as many  pro Second
Amendment people as possible signed up for our free e-mail action alerts.
That way we can tell people what legislators to contact, when to contact
them and what bills need their attention.  At the upcoming gun show we will
be distributing flyers that will encourage people to sign up for our e-mail
action alerts and educate them on current issues. To have success during the
next legislative session it is imperative that we reach as many people as
possible at the upcoming gun show.  The best way of reaching the several
thousand people who attend this show is to have a large number of people
passing out literature to people as they leave the show. If you've always
wanted to do something to preserve your rights now is your chance.  Please
volunteer to pass out flyers for a few hours at the upcoming gun show. To
help or get more information send an e-mail to [e-mail] with your
name and phone number.  If you can help out for two hours you will receive
free admission to the show courtesy of Crossroads of the West Gun Shows. The
gun show will be held on Saturday November 20th and Sunday November 21st.

If this action alert was forwarded to you from anyone other than USSC E-mail
Action Alert, you are not on our action alert list.  To be sure that you
continue to receive the latest alerts please sign up for our free E-mail
Action Alerts by sending a request to: [e-mail].  If you know
someone who does not have e-mail capability but would still like to keep
informed you can have them call our legislative hotline: [phone]. For
more detailed information on legislative issues visit our web sight at
www.UtahShootingSports.org/USSC.  Please forward this e-mail action alert to
as many of your pro gun friends as possible.  Our best chance for
preserving our Second Amendment rights is to have as many people as possible
receiving these action alerts.  If you wish to be removed from the USSC
E-Mail Action Alert list, or your address has changed, send an e-mail to:
[e-mail]



-



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

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: FW: NEA gun poll and letters
Date: 19 Nov 1999 16:10:00 -0700


-----

Check it out, the NEA didn't 'fudge' the poll results.
You might want to view this poll from the NEA and read some of the
comments before you pass any more anti 2nd Amendment gun law. The people
do not seem to support more gun laws and in fact want many of them
repealed.

Sincerely,

John L. McKenney
810 W. Huron
Vassar, Michigan 48768

http://www.nea.org/neatoday/9910/debate.html#vote

Letters about the gun control debate...

http://www.nea.org/neatoday/9911/letters.html



-



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

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: FW: Cheap CCW training for Teachers
Date: 21 Nov 1999 10:06:00 -0700


-----

----------

Please distribute this far and wide to every educator you know.
Also, feel free to have it put into any of your local papers.
Normally CCW instructors charge a minimum of $35 to $50 per student.
This will be an excellent class, requiring that participants shoot
live ammo, and it will give a good dose of the laws pertaining to
self defense. Let's fill this class. It's a great opportunity to
win at least a few educators over to our side.

Dave

Press Release:

November 21, 1999

Several Concealed Carry Weapon license instructors are offering CCW
classes to Utah area educators for the cost of materials only. The $15
cost covers classroom rental and copying costs for the state laws and
application. Participants may bring their own handgun and ammunition
or can rent a handgun and ammunition from the instructor for $10 to
$15, depending on the caliber. Most applicants choose to qualify for
both revolver and a semi-automatic type firearms. If the student wishes
to take care of the notary, fingerprints, and photographs at the class,
this service will be available at an additional cost of $20. This class
will fulfill the requirements for Utah's CCW permit.

The in-class instruction is on Dec. 10 (Friday) from 7:00-9:00 p.m.
and the range instruction is on Dec. 11 (Saturday) from 9:00 a.m. until
around 12:00 a.m. All students will be required to demonstrate handling
proficiency with live ammunition on the range. Participants must provide
proof of being an educator (for example, a teaching certificate) to take
this class. Spouses of educators are also welcome at the same cost.

There will be three instructors. Steve Beckstead is an NRA Training
Counselor, Hunter Education, and CCW instructor. Michael Gourley is
a retired teacher and is also an NRA training counselor and Utah
CCW instructor. Terry Tate, president of the Utah Hunter Education
Instructors Association (UHEIA), is certified to teach CCW and
Personal Protection classes for both women and men.

The class will be at the Lee Kay Hunter Education Center on 2100 S.
6000 W in Salt Lake City. To register for this class, educators should
contact Terry Tate at 963-8864 or Steve Beckstead at 280-1863.


-



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

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: FW: On-Line Petition Against More "Gun Control"
Date: 25 Nov 1999 08:33:00 -0700


-----

Here's another petition:

Petition Against Gun Control & Frivolous Lawsuits

We the undersigned are strongly opposed to any further restrictions on
our right to bear arms. We are also strongly opposed to the frivolous
lawsuits being filed against gun manufacturers by various cities. We will
be limiting our purchases from companies in these cities as well as
avoiding these cities for business and vacation purposes.
We will be keeping an eye on the politicians who vote against our wish's
and will vote for or against them accordingly.

http://www.e-thepeople.com/petition.cfm?PETID=270694


-



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

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: FW: Gun Control in Michigan
Date: 28 Nov 1999 22:50:00 -0700


How Gun Control Came to Michigan
by Tim O'Brien, State Chair, Libertarian Party of Michigan

Black history can provide timely lessons that put today's policy debates
in a new light. Take, for instance, the African-American experience with
the right to self-defense.

The story starts in September 1925, when Dr. Ossian Sweet moved his
family into a two-story home on the corner of Garland and Charlevoix on
Detroit's east side. A prominent gynecologist and a graduate of Howard
University medical school, Dr. Sweet had studied and worked in Europe,
including a stint with Nobel Prize winner Madame Curie in Paris, before
settling in Detroit.

One might expect that Sweet would be out of place in the poor, working-class
neighborhood. And he was. But it was not so much because of his wealth
and education as the fact that he was black and the neighbors were white.

After Sweet moved in, a mob of hundreds gathered across the street and
grew increasingly ugly. The Waterworks Park Improvement Association, as
the mob called itself, had driven another black doctor out of his Detroit
home some weeks before.

Anticipating trouble, a dozen police officers cordoned off the area for
three blocks around and walked up and down the street between the mob
and the Sweet residence.

The Sweet family did their best to maintain an air of normalcy. Mrs.
Sweet was in the kitchen preparing dinner, and several family and
friends were helping unpack, when the crowd started howling and stones
began pelting the house.

Dr. Sweet grabbed a gun and dashed to an upstairs window to get a better
and safer view of what was going on outside his new home. Just as he saw
a car with his brother, Henry, and a family friend pull up to the curb,
a rock smashed through the window and showered him in shards.

The now-terrified doctor ran back downstairs to let his brother and
their friend into the house as the crowd was screaming, Here's niggers!
Get them! Get them!

That's when the first shot rang out. In the ensuing pandemonium, no one
is certain how or in what order events then unfolded.

It is certain that six of the 11 people inside the house fired their
weapons, as did at least one police officer outside; in fact, he emptied
his revolver. Two people in the mob were struck, one fatally. The police,
who until gunfire erupted had been little more than spectators, stormed
the house and arrested everyone inside, charging them all with murder.

The sensational case polarized the city, but it ended up assigned to
a judge whose integrity and personal courage would one day make him a
Michigan legend. This is the opportunity of a lifetime to demonstrate
sincere liberalism, remarked the unflappable presiding Judge Frank
Murphy, who immediately released Mrs. Sweet on bail.

Nor were the defendants wanting for high-powered representation.
Clarence Darrow came into Detroit to handle the case. This pioneer in
the cause of equal protection before the law spent three weeks on jury
selection alone, most of it in a painstakingly detailed recounting of
the history of the black man in America.

Following a seven-week trial and three days of often acrimonious
deliberations by the all-white jury, Judge Murphy ruled that a verdict
could not be reached and declared a mistrial.

Prosecutors decided to retry only Ossian's brother, Henry, who had
freely admitted firing his gun.

At the second trial, Darrow never denied that his sole remaining client
may have fired the fatal shot, but argued that the defendant was
justified and acting in self-defense. The second jury (also all-white)
took barely three hours to return a not-guilty verdict.

As a consequence of this incident, the Ku Klux Klan, which operated
much more openly in those days, lobbied for and obtained the first round
of restrictive gun legislation in Michigan. The Public Acts of 1927
included the requirement that citizens obtain government-issued purchase
permits following mandatory safety inspections. Even then, the
opportunity to legally carry the weapon would be granted only at the
whim of unaccountable county gun boards.

Following racial unrest in major American cities across the country in
the early to mid-60s, culminating in the long, hot summer of 1967 the
next round of restrictions came from the federal government in the form
of the Gun Control Act of 1968. This legislation was modeled on the
German Weapons Law of 1938 enacted by the Nazi government.

A revealing feature of the contemporary gun control movement has been
the persistent drive to ban inexpensive handguns, often disparagingly
called Saturday Night Specials, an epithet based on an old racist line
that any kind of riotous going-on was a Niggertown Saturday Night. And,
indeed, it is pretty obvious that, at the least, a ban on inexpensive
weapons targets poor people, if not strictly minorities.

None of this has proved effective in stemming violent crime because
criminals, by definition, do not respect the law. Nevertheless, those
who want to fully disarm the law-abiding have discovered a new tactic.

Since the courts have been unwilling and the Legislature unable to
accomplish the goal of gun control advocates, several major cities
have decided that perhaps civil litigation will hold gun manufacturers
responsible for the misuse of their products and choke off the
marketplace of firearms.

People are waiting to see whether the mayor of Dr. Ossian Sweet's
hometown may follow suit. Had Detroit Mayor Dennis Archer done so last
week, it would have provided a tragically ironic end to Black History
Month. For, as Jews have already discovered, disarming a people is only
the first phase in attempting to end their history entirely.


-



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

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: ADVICE ON STAYING FREE
Date: 28 Nov 1999 22:50:00 -0700


-----

ADVICE ON STAYING FREE
UNREGISTERING YOUR GUN: LIMIT GOVERNMENT

*****************************************
What To Do If The Police Come To Confiscate Your Militia Weapons
see http://www.2ndamendment.net
For legislative updates contact www.nealknox.com and go to
"Scripts from the Firearms Coalition Legislative Update Line"
Writing your congressman can now be accomplished at the
speed of light, thanks to WorldNetDaily's new Legislative
Action Center. http://congress.nw.dc.us/wnd/
You can call your two Senators at [phone] and your
Representative at [phone] at the Capitol Switchboard.
Here is the URL for Congressional Telephone Directory:
http://clerkweb.house.gov/106/mbrcmtee/members/teledir/members/cdframe.htm
Here's an e-mail link to Congress. http://in-search-of.org/
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/
http://www.gunowners.org/mailerx.html
*****************************

The Life and Times of John Hawkins by Weldon Clark

(Any resemblance to persons living or dead is intentional.)

I will tell you, my son, that the government of the United
States, your country, has evolved in some very unhealthy
ways. Most of the politicians are not religious and have taken
up worshiping the government. Regardless of party, power
over your life is their objective. They wish to control your
future and the future of your grandchildren. The image they
hold of the future is one in which you and your grandchildren
are dependent on the government for your personal security.
They know you will begin to resent this sooner or later.
Therefore they want you to have as little power to resist them
as possible. This means they want you to have no firearms.
The have confiscated firearms in your country in New York
City, Cleveland, Connecticut and California. Under various
pretexts they confiscate firearms whenever they can using
every excuse. They plan to do this across the whole country.
My father foresaw this.

When he died he did not mention any firearms in his will. I
and my brothers and sisters sat down at a table and parceled
out guns and ammunition to each of us. If the government wants
to know about my father's guns they can try asking him. Of
course, once you are dead the government cannot get answers
out of you. And you can no longer be prosecuted or imprisoned.

I will parcel out my guns to all of you, my children, provided
you promise never to voluntary or involuntarily register them
with any government local, state, or federal. I will leave you a
thousand rounds of ammunition for each firearm.

As each of you goes through life I would like you to keep any
record of firearm ownership out of the hands of the
government. Avoid registration any way you can. When you
trade firearms with your friends make sure they are indeed
your friends. You should know your friends very well, which
means having only a few good ones. Having bad friends is
the most dangerous thing you can do in life.

When you trade a firearm for a similar firearm, say a .38
S&W for a .38 S&W, you have effectively changed the serial
number on the .38 you own. So it is more difficult for the
government to know who has what gun.

When you obtain a firearm from another person do not keep
any record of the transaction. Then store that firearm away
from your residence for a long period of time. In case you
were set up, the evidence will not be in your possession.

Store your firearms securely. I have a cousin named Francis
Drake who is a little bit on the wicked side. He stores his
firearms protected by a 2000 volt electrical charge. Fran has
done some things to politicians who are anti-gun that I of
course would never do. One of his representatives kept
introducing gun bills. Fran had all kinds of things delivered to
his house, like gravel, sand, and lumber. He had a call girl go
to the representative's house at 3 AM. Fran made sure the
politician never knew who did these things and never knew
why they were done. Soon the other politicians began to
notice that the politician had started to behave strangely.
And he was a lot less effective in doing anything, including
waging his anti-gun crusade. With anonymous phone calls,
Fran set up another anti-gun politician to be investigated on
gun charges. When Fran's police chief called him a
"Neanderthal", Fran got back at him by not saying things that
would have helped the chief in his official duties with the
chief's enemies.

My children, in all areas of your life you must follow a strategy
of resisting government power of any kind. So you must vote
in every election, and you must support those politicians who
will reduce the government's power over your life by helping
to finance and run their campaigns for political office. If you
can bear the company, become useful to the political party in
your area. Get a hold of their supporters list and try to meet
these people. Every once in a while you can get a politician's
attention by talking to his supporters.

You should serve on a jury every chance you get. In any
case where the government is trying to prosecute someone
for a paper crime, such as failing to fill our a firearms
registration form, say nothing but vote not guilty regardless of
the judge's instructions. Judging the correctness of the law
as well as the actions of the accused is your moral duty, and
it is an established principle in American jurisprudence. All
judges say you have to do as they say, but you don't. You
are the real judge in a trial, and you should never convict
anyone who is simply trying to live free.

You should exercise your rights every chance you get,
regardless of whether you have done any thing illegal or not,
and regardless of how you have to do it. One time a
policeman asked me to let him search the trunk of my car. I
told him the lock fell out and he would need a screwdriver.
He did not search the trunk.

Finally, my children, you should serve on any boards or
commissions you can get appointed to. And always, always
in everyday life, as a voter, or as an official of any kind speak
up for, and work toward, more freedom. If you do this -- your
own children--and they're children, and theirs -- will thank you
and bless your memory.
*********************************************
This was part 4 of a 5 parts series.
ConfiscationDefense_1.doc
Go On the offensive 10_CAO_2.doc
12_EffectiveLobbying_3.doc
Unregistering your gun 17_AdviceonStayingFree_4.doc
Running Political Campaigns 19_WinningCampaign_5.doc

The 2ndAmendmentNews Team
The way to protect your own rights is to protect the rights
of others. Our right to own and use firearms is under attack.
This list was created in a hurry due to the emergency
presented by anti-gun politicians and the media dancing
in the blood of those who died in the Colorado massacre.
To join please send E-MAil to [e-mail] with
the text SUBSCRIBE 2nd-Amendment-News

If you wish to subscribe please send a reply to me at
[e-mail] or [e-mail]

Cordially Yours,
The 2ndAmendmentNews Team

2ndAmendmentNews is published by volunteer activists who
support the full original individual rights intent of the 2nd
Amendment and oppose any appeasement on gun rights.
The moderators include Chris Behanna, Weldon Clark (an
NRA director) and Steve Cicero.

If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude
better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from
us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down
and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set
lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our
countrymen. -- Samuel Adams, speech at the Philadelphia
State House, August 1, 1776.



-



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

From: Joe Waldron <[e-mail]>
Subject: SAF FILES LAWSUIT AGAINST MAYORS
Date: 30 Nov 1999 10:52:39 -0800

NEWS RELEASE


Second Amendment Foundation
12500 NE Tenth Place, Bellevue, WA 98005
[phone]  FAX [phone]
http://www.saf.org


For Immediate Release        Contact:  Alan
Gottlieb
[phone]

MAYORS FACE LAWSUIT FILED TUESDAY BY GUN OWNER GROUP

WASHINGTON, DC (Tuesday, November 30, 1999) - The Second Amendment
Foundation (SAF), a firearms civil rights legal defense, research and
educational organization, has filed a federal lawsuit today in
Washington, DC against the U.S. Conference of Mayors (USCM) and certain
individual mayors for conspiracy to violate civil and constitution
rights, including the First, Second and Ninth Amendments, as well as the
creation of undue burden on lawful interstate commerce.

"We warned both the USCM and individual mayors of our intent to defend
our rights and those of millions of law-abiding Americans.  We gave them
every opportunity to cease and desist their warrantless attacks," stated
Alan Gottlieb, SAF founder.  "Now, they are being sued; while their
meritless and frivolous lawsuits are being dealt serious blows in the
courts."

The city of Cincinnati earned the dubious distinction of being the first
city to be derailed in their attack against firearm manufacturers,
distributors and trade associations.  The Court firmly held that the
lawsuit was both vague and unsupported by legal precedent.  A large
portion of the Atlanta lawsuit was also dismissed with serious doubts
surrounding the remaining portion of the suit.  In addition, a ruling in
the Bridgeport lawsuit is expected in the next few weeks.

"As more and more of these city mayors' suits are dismissed, the more it
looks like these suits were only intended to financially injure gun
owners and the federally licensed producers and sellers of firearms,"
stated Gottlieb.  "In addition, the USCM readily admits that they are
seeking legislation in the courtrooms, which is a clear violation of the
separation of powers upon which our great country was founded.  This is
cause to hold individual mayors and the USCM responsible for their
conspiratorial and unconstitutional assaults on law-abiding people."

The SAF lawsuit alleges three counts against the groups.  Count 1 is for
violation of lawful interstate commerce.  The mayor's legal challenges
have already forced several gun makers to declare bankruptcy, severely
downsize their product lines, and/or raise firearm prices, thus hurting
consumers - including taxpayer-funded federal, state and local law
enforcement agencies - all across the country.  Count 2 is for violation
of First Amendment rights.  The mayor's lawsuits have prevented the gun
manufacturers from educating consumers about their products out of fear
of seeing ads in the courtrooms, not to mention that many of the mayor's
lawsuits are trying to eliminate or severely curtail the ability of
running ads on firearm products in general.  Count 3 is for violation of
the Second and Ninth Amendment rights.  The Second Amendment is an
individual right to keep and bears according to the recent United States
v. Emerson, 46 F.Supp.2d 598 (N.D. Tex. 1999).  The mayor's attempt to
abridge the right to keep and bear arms by putting gun makers out of
business causes a violation of the individual's means to self-defense
which is recognized in every courtroom and falls under the Ninth
Amendment rights.

Attorney Richard Gardiner, a well-known Washington, D.C. firearms civil
rights attorney, is the lead attorney working this case against the
mayors.  In addition to Cincinnati, Atlanta, and Bridgeport, the cities
affected by the lawsuit are Boston, Los Angeles, Miami, Newark, New
Orleans, Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit, San Francisco, Berkeley,
Sacramento, Oakland, East Palo Alto, Compton, West Hollywood, Inglewood,
Camden, Wilmington, Gary, and St. Louis.

"The mayors are on notice that their lawsuits will not be free," said
Gottlieb.  "The Second Amendment Foundation and gun owners across the
country will make them accountable for attempting to steal in the
judicial branch what they have failed to rob in the legislative branch."


The Second Amendment Foundation is a tax-exempt education, legal defense
and publishing organization founded in 1974 and has over 600,000
individual citizen supporters nationwide. It previously has funded
successful firearms-related suits against the cities of Los Angeles, New
Haven, CT, and San Francisco on behalf of American gun owners.

                                   -END-

-



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

From: "David Sagers" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fwd: SAF FILES LAWSUIT AGAINST MAYORS
Date: 30 Nov 1999 12:00:45 -0700

Received: from lists.xmission.com
    ([198.60.22.7])
    by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Tue, 30 Nov 1999 11:53:01 -0700
Received: from domo by lists.xmission.com with local (Exim 2.12 #2)
    id 11ssMO-0002th-00
    for [e-mail]; Tue, 30 Nov 1999 11:50:44 -0700
Received: from [206.63.63.62] (helo=mail4.halcyon.com)
    by lists.xmission.com with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2)
    id 11ssMM-0002t8-00
    for [e-mail]; Tue, 30 Nov 1999 11:50:42 -0700
Received: from halcyon.com (blv-pm102-ip18.halcyon.com [206.63.32.78])
    by mail4.halcyon.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA20332;
    Tue, 30 Nov 1999 10:49:51 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en]C-CCK-MCD compaq  (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

NEWS RELEASE


Second Amendment Foundation
12500 NE Tenth Place, Bellevue, WA 98005
[phone]  FAX [phone]
http://www.saf.org


For Immediate Release        Contact:  Alan
Gottlieb                                                                  =
=20
[phone]

MAYORS FACE LAWSUIT FILED TUESDAY BY GUN OWNER GROUP

WASHINGTON, DC (Tuesday, November 30, 1999) - The Second Amendment
Foundation (SAF), a firearms civil rights legal defense, research and
educational organization, has filed a federal lawsuit today in
Washington, DC against the U.S. Conference of Mayors (USCM) and certain
individual mayors for conspiracy to violate civil and constitution
rights, including the First, Second and Ninth Amendments, as well as the
creation of undue burden on lawful interstate commerce.

"We warned both the USCM and individual mayors of our intent to defend
our rights and those of millions of law-abiding Americans.  We gave them
every opportunity to cease and desist their warrantless attacks," stated
Alan Gottlieb, SAF founder.  "Now, they are being sued; while their
meritless and frivolous lawsuits are being dealt serious blows in the
courts."

The city of Cincinnati earned the dubious distinction of being the first
city to be derailed in their attack against firearm manufacturers,
distributors and trade associations.  The Court firmly held that the
lawsuit was both vague and unsupported by legal precedent.  A large
portion of the Atlanta lawsuit was also dismissed with serious doubts
surrounding the remaining portion of the suit.  In addition, a ruling in
the Bridgeport lawsuit is expected in the next few weeks.

"As more and more of these city mayors' suits are dismissed, the more it
looks like these suits were only intended to financially injure gun
owners and the federally licensed producers and sellers of firearms,"
stated Gottlieb.  "In addition, the USCM readily admits that they are
seeking legislation in the courtrooms, which is a clear violation of the
separation of powers upon which our great country was founded.  This is
cause to hold individual mayors and the USCM responsible for their
conspiratorial and unconstitutional assaults on law-abiding people."

The SAF lawsuit alleges three counts against the groups.  Count 1 is for
violation of lawful interstate commerce.  The mayor's legal challenges
have already forced several gun makers to declare bankruptcy, severely
downsize their product lines, and/or raise firearm prices, thus hurting
consumers - including taxpayer-funded federal, state and local law
enforcement agencies - all across the country.  Count 2 is for violation
of First Amendment rights.  The mayor's lawsuits have prevented the gun
manufacturers from educating consumers about their products out of fear
of seeing ads in the courtrooms, not to mention that many of the mayor's
lawsuits are trying to eliminate or severely curtail the ability of
running ads on firearm products in general.  Count 3 is for violation of
the Second and Ninth Amendment rights.  The Second Amendment is an
individual right to keep and bears according to the recent United States
v. Emerson, 46 F.Supp.2d 598 (N.D. Tex. 1999).  The mayor's attempt to
abridge the right to keep and bear arms by putting gun makers out of
business causes a violation of the individual's means to self-defense
which is recognized in every courtroom and falls under the Ninth
Amendment rights.

Attorney Richard Gardiner, a well-known Washington, D.C. firearms civil
rights attorney, is the lead attorney working this case against the
mayors.  In addition to Cincinnati, Atlanta, and Bridgeport, the cities
affected by the lawsuit are Boston, Los Angeles, Miami, Newark, New
Orleans, Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit, San Francisco, Berkeley,
Sacramento, Oakland, East Palo Alto, Compton, West Hollywood, Inglewood,
Camden, Wilmington, Gary, and St. Louis.

"The mayors are on notice that their lawsuits will not be free," said
Gottlieb.  "The Second Amendment Foundation and gun owners across the
country will make them accountable for attempting to steal in the
judicial branch what they have failed to rob in the legislative branch."


The Second Amendment Foundation is a tax-exempt education, legal defense
and publishing organization founded in 1974 and has over 600,000
individual citizen supporters nationwide. It previously has funded
successful firearms-related suits against the cities of Los Angeles, New
Haven, CT, and San Francisco on behalf of American gun owners.

                                   -END-

-



-



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

From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: LPU: FW: They're thieves, too.
Date: 30 Nov 1999 11:04:00 -0700


Regardless of the application of the revenue, the Pittman-Robertson
Act is not only theft but also an unconstitutional infringement of
the RKBA. It is well past time to dump it since it is now quite well
settled that the 2nd Amendment doesn't authorize the National Guard.

Scott

-----

The gov't continues to conspire against us.

It appears that not only are the anti gun groups spreading lies but
they're doing it with stolen money this makes them liars and thieves in
my book. This is the tax dollars paid by sports persons, tax money
designated for sporting use only, i.e.: range development and shooting
safety programs. Contact your Senator and Congressional Representative
immediately or Reno/Clinton will do nothing to prosecute the thieves,
may be too close to home for them to anyway. We can only hope that the
elected representative will initiate prosecution and see it thru this
time.

-----
OUTDOOR LIFE
NOVEMBER 1999

Show Us Our Money-Are sportsmen's dollars going to the antis?
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has allegedly looted two sportsmen's
conservation programs, sending money to slush funds and possibly to
anti-hunting organizations.  The two programs are the Pittman-Robertson
Act and the Dingell-Johnson Act-legislation that calls for excise taxes on
sporting equipment (P-R on arms and ammunition; D-J on fishing
merchandise).  Money raised is earmarked for state fish and wildlife
conservation projects, but according to a preliminary audit by the General
Accounting Office (GAO), some of the money has been illegally diverted.

As of press time, the House of Representatives' Resources Committee and
the GAO are investigating, and hearings are scheduled.  The Resources
Committee has held some hearings in a "discovery period" (preliminary to
legal and/or legislative action).

Representative Don Young, of Alaska, chairman of the Resources Committee,
did not tiptoe around the intent of those hearings.  In his opening
remarks, he said, "This hearing is about stealing conservation dollars to
float the Fish and Wildlife Service.  The GAO and our investigative staff
found big abuses...We have just scratched the surface of these
abuses-abuses that total millions of dollars."-Frank Miniter



-



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

From: "charles lee" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Shooting ranges near Ogden
Date: 30 Nov 1999 14:51:05 PST


Hello,

   I am new to Utah. I was wondering if anyone can point me torwards a
shooting range that is located in Ogden or within a one hour drive. I shoot
a pistol. Preferably, I'm looking for an outdoor range that is open any day
of the week and that doesn't require user fees.

    Any advice would be appreciated.

    Charles


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

-



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

From: "Athay, Mark" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Shooting ranges near Ogden
Date: 30 Nov 1999 14:54:00 -0800

I know there is a range up that way.  I live in Bountiful and the Lion's
Club operates a range just north of the "B" up on the hill at about 1000
North.  It has an excellent rifle range and a good pistol range as well.
The cost is $1.00 per person per day.  They even give you a target to use.

Mark R. Athay  P.E.
NTO Suite 330
[phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]


-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 1999 3:51 PM



Hello,

   I am new to Utah. I was wondering if anyone can point me torwards a
shooting range that is located in Ogden or within a one hour drive. I shoot
a pistol. Preferably, I'm looking for an outdoor range that is open any day
of the week and that doesn't require user fees.

    Any advice would be appreciated.

    Charles


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

-



-