ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/utah-firearms/archive/utah-firearms.200003

Internet Message Format | 2000-03-30 | 229KB

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: LEG-ALERTS 2-29: Good news, bad news!
Date: 01 Mar 2000 09:58:06 -0700

-----
Today is the last and most dangerous day for the legislature that
has already been labeled the worst in recent history.

----------

Apologies if this is a duplicate. I'm still having computer problems...

Contact info for ALL legislators can be found at: http://www.utguns.freeservers.com
Senate number 801-538-1035 House number 801-538-1029

BAD NEWS!!

BETRAYAL ON SB 72!
SB 72 has been substituted yet again and is now on its 4th substitute,
sponsored by Blake Chard. The "new" bill mandates a LIFETIME REVOCATION
OF RIGHTS for anyone who has EVER been committed to a mental institution
- even if the person was wrongfully committed, even if the person has
recovered fully. This is nothing but a back-door approach to revoking
your gun rights FOREVER without having to bother with inconvenient and
expensive "technicalities" like due process and jury trials.

SB 72 still contains all the other offensive provisions including an
unconstitutional revocation of rights for juveniles, LIFETIME revocation
of rights for possession of a single pain pill while in possession of a
firearm (i.e. more revocation of rights for misdemeanors!), and LIFETIME
revocation of rights for those dishonorably discharged from the military
for POLITICAL reasons.

Enough is enough! Insist that YOUR representative KILL SB 72 NOW!


HB 372 STILL ALIVE...

Many of you have written saying that legislators are telling you that
SB 372 has been "fixed". THIS IS NOT TRUE! While Sen. Waddoups's
substitute takes out the horrible language proposed by Rep. Garn,
it does NOTHING to fix the many problems in the existing code. If
legislators want to play with the concealed carry law, they need to
make it BETTER!

Rep. Garn has asked me to make it clear that the problem language is
NOT anything he personally wrote. It's bad language that's ALREADY in
the Code. However, Rep. Garn chose NOT TO amend this language, while
he was amending existing code to make things worse for gun owners.

Problems with the bill include:

Mandates revocation or denial of a concealed carry permit for MISDEMEANORS and INFRACTIONS!

Allows revocation or denial of a concealed carry permit based on
completely unproven allegations that a person is or has been a "danger".
If an irate neighbor says you're dangerous, you can lose your permit!

Allows BCI to deny a permit based on expunged records!

Allows BCI to deny a permit based on juvenile records!

Requires you to provide a five year employment history. (Wouldn't
you love to have BCI call your employer and tell him you've applied
for a carry permit - especially if you work for an anti-gun employer
like the University of Utah or a public school?!)

Requires YOU to prove that you have a "good character",
rather than requiring BCI to prove you don't.

Revocation of permits is based on preponderance of the evidence,
which again means YOU have to PROVE YOUR INNOCENCE!

There is STILL no liability protection for instructors.

Even worse, the forces of evil are rallying to tack on every
conceivable gun control provision! It is not likely that we will
be able to defeat all of them!

This means we will LOSE MORE RIGHTS and will not gain anything!
Does that sound like a "compromise" to you? (Yes, Rep. Garn has
promised to kill the bill if it's amended, but this is still a
risky way to pass legislation.)

There's only ONE DAY LEFT! The ONLY SOLUTION is to KILL HB 372!
Don't let your legislators sweet talk you. Let them know the bill
must DIE!! Call your Senator and Representative NOW!! Both UTGuns
and Gun Owners of America OPPOSE this bill. Don't let ANYONE tell
you that "All gun groups have approved this bill!"

HB 161 - Juvenile Brady (Tyler) passed it final vote in the Senate
today and will soon be on its way to Gov. Leavitt. Please ask Gov.
Leavitt to VETO this bill! 538-1000


GOOD NEWS! Forfeiture lobby loses, property rights win!

Thanks to YOUR EFFORTS, HB 173, Computer Forfeiture (Buckner) was DEFEATED
in the Senate earlier today. This is a HUGE achievement as SIX Senators
agreed to change their votes overnight. Thanks to ALL of you!

Reps. Swallow and Wright have also agreed to kill HB 124, Asset
Forfeiture revisions, so that we can work together to create a bill
that will have unqualified support. However, the bill is still on
the calendar. Please THANK Reps. Wright and Swallow, and encourage
them to formally remove the bill from consideration. 538-1029


MORE GOOD NEWS!
HB 199, Limitation on Liability for Gun Manufacturers (Throckmorton)
passed its final vote today! Congratulations and a big THANK YOU to
Rep. Matt Throckmorton for having the courage to run a PRO-GUN bill!
HB 199 will soon be on its way to Gov. Leavitt, so please make sure
he knows that you expect him to SIGN this bill! 801-538-1000


BILLS IN RULES THAT NEED TO STAY THERE!
Remember that ANY bill can be released and have a vote right up
until midnight tomorrow! We need to stay ALERT!

Please write to the SENATE RULES COMMITTEE and ask them to:
HOLD HB 176S3 - Weapons Restrictions for Mentally Ill (G. Cox)
HOLD HB 91 - Tax Credits for Safes (Bennion)
RELEASE HB 296 - Prevention of Retaliatory Lawsuits (Lockhart)

Please write to the HOUSE RULES COMMITTEE and ask them to:
HOLD SB 32 - Marksmanship Tests for Concealed Carry (R. Allen)
HOLD SB 37 - School Surveys (Montgomery)
HOLD SB 200 - Civil Commitments (Montgomery)
and especially... HOLD SB 72 4th Sub. - Restricted Persons (Spencer)

Lists are available at: http://www.utguns.freeservers.com/legalerts022400.html

ONLY ONE MORE DAY! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU!

Sarah

-



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

From: Chad Leigh <[e-mail]>
Subject: cnn poll
Date: 02 Mar 2000 12:59:16 -0500

cnn has a poll about the NRAs influence in congress.  Go vote no!

http://www.cnn.com





-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: Another L. Neil Smith essay
Date: 03 Mar 2000 07:10:35 -0700

Getting Back at TV Propagandists
by L. Neil Smith

As a novelist, I have a higher soapbox to stand on than most when
it comes to talking back to the enemies of liberty. Yet it makes
me just as mad when ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, CNN, and NPR not only lie
consistently and blatantly about the individual right to own and
carry weapons, but insert their lies into "news" and programs
billed as entertainment.

It's been going on for decades. You know when a politician's lying
-- his mouth moves -- but broadcasters lie with a twitch of an
eyebrow or the slant of a shoulder. They load questions for the
"man in the street" and get the public to lie for them. They even
lie by making sure the badguy in a series episode has rifles and
game trophies on his wall.

The most infuriating part is that you can't talk back. Broadcasters
take advantage of the fact that any amateur, offered a chance to
be on TV, is easily made to look foolish. Ask those who've tried:
I give speeches where people laugh in all the right places and
grown men have wept. The one occasion I tried replying to a TV
editorial, I looked like Archie Bunker. Most anti-gun propaganda
can't be dealt with in this manner anyway, because the other side's
too dishonest to present it as a straightforward editorial.

Since the Bill of Rights protects a broadcaster's freedom under
the First Amendment to attack our freedom under the Second, the
next thought that occurs to the irate viewer is to get back at
propagandists through their wallets, boycotting programs or their
sponsors. I've never been impressed with the tactic. True, you
deprive the enemy of income; you also deprive yourself of whatever
he produces, maybe something you really need. Sometimes it's worth
a sacrifice, sometimes it isn't, and individual opinions always
differ.

The main problem is that for a boycott to be effective, you must
persuade thousands, even millions of others to go along -- a lot
of work and usually not very successful. No matter what this
country's self-appointed political and religious leaders claim,
self-sacrifice has never been what America is all about and it
doesn't work as any kind of incentive. Robert Heinlein put it
best when he said it's pointless to appeal to someone's "better
nature". He may not have one. Better to appeal to his self-interest.

Which is where my thoughts had led me many times (and dumped me
out at what seemed the end of the line) when one day I asked
myself the right question: if boycotts don't work, what's the
opposite of a boycott? Obviously it isn't doing more business
with the enemy. How about doing more business with whatever
the enemy opposes?

Call it a negative boycott.

Since then, when I find myself subjected to anti-gun drivel
disguised as "news" or "entertainment", I drop a quarter (or a
dime, a nickel or a penny) into a coffee can I keep beside the
chair where I watch TV. Given the rate at which propaganda fills
the air, it's no time at all before the can fills up. When enough
accumulates, I don't give it to the NRA or any other organization
whose policies I neither control nor necessarily approve. I spend
it the best way I know, in the free marketplace of ideas -- and
hardware -- acquiring another gun I wouldn't otherwise have bought.

Think about it: another gun you wouldn't otherwise have bought.

Many benefits are generated this way with minimal effort and
no pain. Appeal to the self-interest of enough gun owners, and
hundreds of thousands -- maybe even millions -- of unforeseen gun
purchases will occur. This will strengthen the firearms industry
relative to the rest of the economy and even put some spine back
into outfits who've taken the cowardly, historically discredited
route of appeasing an oppressor. It didn't work with Hitler; why
does Bill Ruger think it'll work with Hitler's spiritual kin,
Howard Metzenbaum?

Spotting anti-gun propaganda could make watching network TV
interesting again -- a minor miracle in itself -- and might even
develop into an educational game for the whole family. Kids would
learn what the public schools never teach and desperately doesn't
want them to know: ways to identify logical fallacies, fuzzy or
missing verbs, and improperly weighted qualifiers in otherwise
authoritative-sounding arguments about homelessness, urban street
gangs, acid rain, ozone depletion, global warming, and the war on
drugs.

The primary effect will be felt by our opponents as their own
soapboxes slowly dissolve under their feet. Even now, each time
the greatest sporting-goods sales team in America -- Handgun
Control Inc. -- open their mouths about gun control or push for
new legislation, thousands of individuals go out and buy guns of
all descriptions "before it's too late". Some estimate that the
last flurry of semiauto hysteria sold a quarter of a million
such weapons in Colorado alone.

Until now, anti-gunners have encouraged the media to keep the
public ignorant of this interesting, inconvenient effect. But
as word of millions of coffee cans filling up with coins -- and
suddenly being emptied -- gets around, an inexorable certainty that
anti-gun propaganda actually causes more guns to be bought will put
a damper on broadcasters' enthusiasm to saturate the air with lies.

The best part (and most frustrating from the other side's point of
view) is that nobody is in a position to think, speak, or act for
you. It's your TV, your chair, your coffee can. In your home you're
the only judge of what constitutes anti-gun propaganda. You decide
how much to drop in the can. You're the ultimate beneficiary.

So let your local TV stations -- and the networks -- know what you
are doing. And do it. Then trust in liberal guilt to do the rest.

-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Clinton seeks to end gun impasse
Date: 03 Mar 2000 10:43:49 -0700

What a ghoul!
"Maybe this tragic death will help" - President Bill Clinton

http://www.freep.com/news/kayla/ding3_20000303.htm

Clinton seeks to end gun impasse

But Dingell urges enforcement of existing laws

March 3, 2000

BY MELANIE EVERSLEY
FREE PRESS WASHINGTON STAFF

WASHINGTON -- Seeking momentum on gun
control from the Mt. Morris Township
school shooting, President Bill
Clinton has summoned congressional
leaders to the White House in hopes
of breaking an impasse on mandatory
gun safety locks and gun-show
background checks.

"Maybe this tragic death will help,"
the president said Thursday,
referring to Tuesday's fatal shooting
of 6-year-old Kayla Rolland by a
classmate using a stolen .32-caliber
semiautomatic gun.

But Rep. John Dingell of Dearborn,
one of the staunchest Democratic
defenders of gun rights, said
Thursday too little is known about
the shooting to form conclusions
about what America should do to curb
gun violence.

"We don't know exactly what happened
here," Dingell said. "At first,
before you rush out to cure a
disease, you have to diagnose it,
and the ancient abjuration of the
Hippocratic oath comes into play,
which is, 'Do no harm.'"

Dingell said the United States should
better enforce its existing laws. In
the meantime, he said, he will continue
to support the rights of gun owners.

Still, there was talk on Capitol Hill
of compromise between Republicans and
Democrats after months of inaction.

"We'll take whatever we can agree on
-- gun shows, clips, safety locks,"
said Senate Minority Leader Tom
Daschle, D-S.D. "We're currently
doing nothing."

Rep. Henry Hyde, R-Ill., chairman of
the House Judiciary Committee, said:
"We have a reasonable gun bill. If
the Democrats want a bill, we can do
it. If they want the issue, we'll
have the issue." He said he was open
to compromise. "I think the country
wants legislation."

Clinton is inviting congressional
leaders to the White House on Tuesday
to lobby for a juvenile-justice bill
that includes gun-control measures.
Congress deadlocked over the issue
last session.

During an appearance on the "Today"
show Thursday morning, Clinton said
better research on new gun
technologies, more focus on parental
responsibility and stricter
gun-licensing measures might help
curb gun violence.

House and Senate members who debated
the juvenile-justice bill last
session, including U.S. Rep. John
Conyers, D-Mich., will be among those
invited, but it wasn't decided as of
Thursday afternoon whether Dingell
would be among the guests, said White
House spokeswoman Sarah Gegenheimer.

Dingell said he would attend if
invited. But he declined to predict
what the meeting might accomplish.

Similar caution was expressed
Thursday by advocates on both sides
of the gun debate, who have watched
the issue simmer since the shooting
at Columbine High School in
Littleton, Colo., last spring.

Although it is chiefly the Republican
leadership in Congress that has
fought against sweeping gun-control
measures in a juvenile-justice bill,
they have found an ally in Dingell,
said Marie Carbone, director of
congressional relations for Handgun
Control, a pro-gun-control group in
Washington.

"His stance gave the Republican
leadership the ability to say there
are people on both sides of the aisle
that are opposed to this," she said
Thursday. "Everyone knows where Mr.
Dingell stands on this, and he's in
the minority of his party."

The National Rifle Association, the
premiere gun-rights organization
based in Fairfax, Va., pointed out
that the president opposed the
package that went before Congress
last summer.

"Legislation could have passed last
summer -- he was against it then,"
Trish Hylton, NRA spokeswoman, said
Thursday. "Now he's saying the
solution is trigger locks, and he
never mentioned parenting or the
atrocious conditions under which this
child was living," Hylton added of
the alleged 6-year-old shooter.

Democrats killed the gun-control
portion of the juvenile-justice bill
in June after the House passed a
provision, written by Dingell and
backed by Republicans, that Democrats
said weakened a measure requiring
background checks on handgun buyers.

-



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

From: Joe Waldron <[e-mail]>
Subject: CITIBANK FOLDS
Date: 03 Mar 2000 12:20:22 -0800

The following was received by the Second Amendment Foundation on
3 March 2000:

QUOTE

Public Information

           CITIBANK MEDIA STATEMENT

      RE:  SMALL FIREARMS BUSINESS POLICY

March 2, 2000--In researching our recent interaction with the
Nevada Pistol Academy, certain incvonsistencies were identified
in our policies within the consumer bank.  These have been
corrected.  Moving forward, our practice of assessing a
prospective small business account on the basis of an evaluation
of the individual business will apply uniformly across the
consumer bank.  Small businesses engaged in the manufacture or
sale of small firearms will be evaluated in the same manner as
any other small business, using the same standards such as
creditworthiness and number of years in business.

UNQUOTE

-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: Ventilation Help Needed
Date: 03 Mar 2000 13:48:49 -0700

Jim Dexter and the USSC ask:

-----

If you know of anyone who qualifies, please help this worthy cause . . .

----------

USSC is sending this notice on behalf of the Utah Precision Marksmanship
Society (UPMS), one of our affiliated organizations.   They are looking for
people with expertise in ventilation systems. Engineers, architects, sheet
metal contractors, heating/air conditioning contractors or anyone else who
can help with the design phase of work needed to meet recommended air flow
standards. (Standards have been established by NRA range development
engineers, and need to be applied to this facility). We need to get this
done on a very urgent basis.

The University of Utah will shut down the NRTOC range facility if the
ventilation flow is not increased. This is one of the few indoor smallbore
rifle and pistol facilities left on the east side of Salt Lake City. It is
used by several clubs as well as the NROTC collegiate pistol team. If
closed, these programs will probably stop due to lack of facilities.

Closing down range facilities is a sneaky method used by anti-gun people to
harass legitimate shooting sports. Thirty years ago nearly every high school
and college in the state had their own indoor ranges and active marksmanship
athletic programs. Now there are only two or three left.

If you can help, or know someone else willing to help, please contact Matt
DeLong [phone], or e-mail- [e-mail] If you cannot
reach him, e-mail back to USSC.

-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: Gun-rights organizations at odds
Date: 03 Mar 2000 15:39:02 -0700

-----

A member of GOPConservatives has written an article for World News
Daily regarding the NRA, GOA, and Sen. Hatch.  Partial story below.
Entire story at URL.
[e-mail] (Rich Kuchinsky)

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_bresnahan/20000302_xex_gunrights_br.shtml

Gun-rights organizations at odds
Are Second Amendment groups
shooting at each other?

By David M. Bresnahan
⌐ 2000 WorldNetDaily.com

In what could be called a classic case of "idealists versus realists," two of
the nation's leading gun-rights organizations are at odds with each other
over how best to safeguard Americans' constitutional right to keep and bear
arms.

Symptomatic of the division is the stunning division between the National
Rifle Association and Gun Owners of America over U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch,
R.-Utah. The NRA regards Hatch as one of the true congressional heroes for
his past efforts on behalf of Second Amendment issues, while rival GOA
regards Hatch as a "compromiser" -- and is even talking about trying to
unseat him in his upcoming re-election bid.

Hatch is the powerful chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, where many
gun bills must first receive a hearing. GOA Executive Director Larry Pratt
told WorldNetDaily that Hatch has voted in favor of many gun control laws
while claiming to be a supporter of gun rights. In fact, Pratt recently
sent....

-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: JPFO Blasts AJC for 'Ghetto Jew Mentality' in School Shooting
Date: 03 Mar 2000 15:44:43 -0700

-----

JPFO Blasts AJC for 'Ghetto Jew Mentality' in School Shooting
U.S. Newswire
3 Mar 10:55

Jewish Group Blasts AJC for 'Ghetto Jew Mentality' in Grade School Killing
Contact: Aaron Zelman of Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership Inc.,
800-869-1884; e-mail: [e-mail]; Website: http://www.jpfo.org

HARTFORD, Wis., March 3 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Jews for the
Preservation of Firearms Ownership (JPFO) strongly denounced the
March 1 statement issued by the American Jewish Congress (AJC)
which called for more federal victim disarmament laws. The AJC's
statement, responding to the Feb. 29 Michigan grade school killing,
demanded "tough gun control legislation" as the remedy. Speaking
for JPFO, Aaron Zelman called the AJC's demand an example of
"ghetto Jew mentality."

"Turning to a secular central government to solve a parenting
problem shows how morally bankrupt the AJC position is," said Zelman,
JPFO's executive director. "Judaism is about timeless moral values
and strong family structures -- not about calling in the federal
government every time somebody commits a crime."

"By agitating for more victim disarmament laws, the AJC works
against Jewish values. Jews, like everyone else, have a duty to
protect and defend themselves and their families against violence,"
Zelman noted. "Turning to a non-Jewish secular government to save
everyone from crime violates Jewish principles -- it's making the
state your god."

Zelman challenged the AJC to affirm traditional values and morals.
"I don't see the AJC actively working to preserve the Jewish
principles of fundamental respect for human life, punishment of
wrongdoers, and clear moral training of children. The AJC wants the
federal government to prevent honest citizens from having the tools
for self-protection, yet the AJC does nothing to knit the social
fabric around God's laws."

Anticipating a flurry of calls for victim disarmament laws, Zelman
criticized the lobbyists who "advance the political agenda called
'gun control' on the bodies of dead children." He also noted that the
Mount Morris grade school tragedy would get national media attention,
while the thousands of cases of children being protected by armed
defenders go unreported. "According to Florida State University
Professor Gary Kleck's research, firearms are used to prevent crime
nearly 2 million times per year. Firearms misuse is comparatively
rare but grabs the headlines," Zelman said.

With the AJC's advocating more federal victim disarmament, Zelman
observed that "the AJC ignores both Jewish morality and the importance
of armed self-defense. Historically, that combination has been lethal
for Jews. The AJC certainly demolishes the image that Jews are smart."

-0-
/U.S. Newswire 202-347-2770/
03/03 10:55

Copyright 2000, U.S. Newswire

-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: LEG-ALERTS 3-2: HUGE VICTORY FOR GUN OWNERS!
Date: 03 Mar 2000 15:57:29 -0700

-----
WE DID IT FOLKS! WE DID FAR BETTER THAN ANY OF US COULD HAVE EXPECTED!
THANKS TO ALL OF YOU!

The tally: Of 17 anti-gun bill, only 5 passed - and not one contained
"major" gun control. Twelve anti-gun bills were defeated or never had
a vote. In addition, both asset forfeiture bills went down. One pro-gun
bill passed.

The list:
Anti-gun bills that passed:
HB 161: Juvenile Brady (Tyler): Unconstitutional "ex post facto" law.
Includes juvenile records in background checks.
HB 176: Weapons Restrictions for Mentally Ill (G. Cox): Deals only with
REPORTING to BCI, not prohibited persons. Requires reporting of anyone
who has EVER been committed to a mental institution, and anyone subject
to a "protective order". This information will be used, in conjunction
with other bills, to deny firearms rights.
HB 245: Safety in Public Schools (Wright): Expulsion of students who
bring guns to school. Mandatory expulsion for real guns, conditional
expulsion for toy guns. NO mandatory expulsion for violent crimes that
do not involve guns. (It is already illegal for anyone other than a law
enforcement officer or CCW permittee to bring a gun to school, so this
is unnecessary!)
HB 372 - Concealed Firearms (Garn, Cox, Waddoups): Allows BCI to revoke
certification of concealed carry instructors; makes other minor changes
to concealed carry law.
SB 72 - Restricted persons (Spencer): Unconstitutional ex post facto law.
Revokes firearms rights for life for anyone who has ever been committed
to a mental institution. Revokes rights for 7-10 years for anyone
adjudicated delinquent for a felony level offense. Revokes rights for
life for anyone in possession of a firearm and a Schedule I controlled
substance (street drug).

Anti-gun bills that were defeated:
HB 95 - Weapons Amendments (Jones) Would have mandated background checks
and registration for all private firearms transfers at gun shows. In order
to enforce this, all attendees at gun shows would have to be registered.
HB 174 - Public Safety Fee Process Revisions (Chard) Would have allowed
BCI to raise fees for background checks and permits (among others) without
legislative oversight.
HB 248 - Weapons Restrictions - Houses of Worship, Residences and Schools
(Jones) Would have banned firearms in schools, churches and private
residences unless the person carrying the firearm had prior permission to
do so.
HB 363 - Gun Restriction Amendments (G. Cox) Would have revoked firearms
rights for juveniles adjudicated delinquent for felony offenses or anyone
ever committed to a mental institution. Would have revoked rights for
nonviolent misdemeanors.
HB 383 - Revocation of Concealed Firearm Permits (Brown) Would have
outlawed open carry, as well as all shooting sports
SB 32 - Concealed Permit Holders Requirements (R. Allen) Would have
required a marksmanship test to obtain a concealed carry permit.
SB 161 - Restrictions on Weapons - Schools (Beattie) Would have required
a person lawfully carrying a firearm to report to the principal's office
when entering a school and "confess" that he was carrying a firearm.
Would have made it possible for schools to harass or dismiss employees
who chose to carry firearms.
SB 162 - Restrictions on Weapons - Churches (Beattie) Would have required
a person lawfully carrying a firearm to ask permission of a church
authority in order to do so.

Anti-gun bills that never made it to a vote:
SB 44 - Background check on Private Handgun Transfers (Peterson) Would
have required a background check and registration of all private handgun
transfers. Would have allowed local law enforcement to outlaw private
transfers.
SB 79 - Weapons Restrictions Amendments (Spencer) Would have revoked
firearms rights for a long list of misdemeanors
SB 87 - Firearms Amendments - Churches and Residences (Peterson) Would
have banned the lawful carry of firearms in churches and private
residences without prior permission
SB 153 - Criminal Penalty Amendments (Spencer) Would have revoked
firearms rights for a long list of misdemeanors

Pro-gun bills passed:
HB 199 - Limitation of Liability for Gun Manufacturers (Throckmorton)
- Prohibits frivolous lawsuits against firearms manufacturers.

Asset forfeiture bills defeated:
HB 173 - Computer forfeiture (Buckner) - Would have allowed seizure
of computer equipment and data for trivial offenses. Owner would be
required to prove his property's innocence. No provisions for payment
of legal fees for innocent owners.
HB 124 - Asset Forfeiture (Wright, Swallow) - Did not address problem
of federal adoption of forfeitures, without which other reforms are
not effective. Bill sponsors agreed to hold this bill for future study.

Misc. losses
HB 296 - Prevention of Retaliatory Lawsuits (Lockhart) Would have
prevented lawsuits designed to silence activists. The Senate
repeatedly refused to vote on this bill, so it expired at midnight.


Full voting records are not yet available. However, once they are,
voting records and the UTGuns legislative ratings will be made public.

Full report on the shameful and deceitful goings on during the last
hours of the session to follow! However, Rep. John Swallow deserves
a LOT of credit for being the ONLY Representative trying to work WITH
gun owners.

Thanks to ALL of you for your hard work, calls, letters, attendance
at hearings, etc. The 2000 legislative session was a huge victory
for gun owners, and YOU deserve credit! THANK YOU! Your dedication
is very much appreciated!

Unfortunately, now is not the time to relax! While final ratings
are not yet available, the number of solidly pro-gun, pro-rights
legislators on the Hill is ZERO! If you don't want to spend another
two years battling full time just to slow down the destruction of
your rights, you need to get involved and help us CLEAN HOUSE (and
Senate)! This is the ONLY way (or at least the only peaceful way)
to restore and defend our rights!

Please take a minute NOW to go to the UTGuns Delegate information
and sign-up page at http://www.utguns.freeservers.com/volunteer.html.
We have good, principled, pro-gun, pro-liberty people running for
office, but they need YOUR help! PLEASE join us! The rights you save
will be your own!

Thanks again!
Sarah

-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: LP RELEASE: Child Shooting
Date: 03 Mar 2000 17:04:26 -0700

Study: Gun training (not gun bans) can help reduce tragic child violence

WASHINGTON, DC -- The shooting of a Michigan 6-year-old may focus renewed
attention on a federal study with an unconventional conclusion: Giving kids
more access to guns may actually help reduce such tragic incidents in the
future, the Libertarian Party said today.

"Instead of using the death of Kayla Rolland as an excuse to impose more gun
control, politicians like Bill Clinton should read this study -- since it
demonstrates that children who are taught by parents to use guns responsibly
are far less likely to commit crimes," said Steve Dasbach, the party's
national director.

"No, we can't say that this particular shooting could have been prevented --
or that this troubled 6-year-old should have been given a gun by his equally
troubled parents. But what we can say is that, in general, the most
effective way to reduce firearm-related violence among children is to buy
them a gun and teach them how to use it responsibly."

That surprising discovery is contained in a study by the federal government
entitled, "Urban Delinquency and Substance Abuse," which was conducted from
1993-1995 by the U.S. Department of Justice's Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention.

In an effort to determine the relationship between "problem behaviors" like
drug use, teen pregnancy, and crime, child psychologists tracked 4,000 boys
and girls aged 6 to 15 in Denver, Pittsburgh, and Rochester, NY.

The findings were a slap in the face to "conventional wisdom" about children
and guns, said Dasbach -- and a sharp rebuke to Bill Clinton's renewed calls
for mandatory trigger locks and other gun control measures in the wake of
Tuesday's shooting in Mount Morris Township, Michigan.

According to the study:

* Children who get guns from their parents don't commit gun crimes (0%),
while children who get illegal guns are very likely to do so (21%).

* Children who get guns from parents are less likely to commit any kind of
street crime (14%) than children who have no gun in the house (24%) -- and
are dramatically less likely to do so than children who acquire an illegal
gun (74%).

* Children who get guns from parents are less likely to use drugs (13%) than
children who get illegal guns (41%).

"Boys who own legal firearms have much lower rates of delinquency and drug
use [than boys who get illegal guns] and are even slightly less delinquent
than non-owners of guns," the study reported.

"The evidence is in: When it comes to preventing youthful violence,
responsible parents and the Second Amendment apparently work better than
politicians' irresponsible proposals, such as so-called smart-gun technology
or mandated safety locks," said Dasbach.

Are Libertarians saying that every parent should buy their child a gun?

"Of course not," said Dasbach. "Deciding whether to give your son or
daughter a gun -- and teaching them how to use it -- is a serious decision
that every parent will have to make. Many parents will properly decide that
their children are not mature enough to learn how to use a gun safely. But
the point is: Responsible parents are better able to make that decision than
a bunch of irresponsible politicians in Washington, DC.

"Such an enlightened approach to gun ownership will not bring Kayla Rolland
back to life," Dasbach acknowledged. "But it would make it less likely that
another Kayla Rolland would die in such a tragic and pointless incident. And
that would be a step in the right direction."

#       #       #

-



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

From: Joe Waldron <[e-mail]>
Subject: KING COUNTY (WA) GUN POLL
Date: 03 Mar 2000 17:09:25 -0800

Gun-grabbing King County Executive Ron Sims has placed a gun
question on the weekly poll at the KC web site.  Located in the
column on the left (where else?), the question reads, "In
general, do you think that laws covering firearm sales should be
more strict, less strict, or kept the same?"

Your proper response would be appreciated.  (BTW, this is the
King County of Kellerman "43 times" fame.)

Many thanks to King County Councilman Kent Pullen for the early
warning.  The poll will remain on the site through next
Thursday.

The web site is located at http://www.metrokc.gov/exec/

Thanx,
Joe W

-



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

From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Guns in School study info from World Congress of Families
Date: 06 Mar 2000 16:44:46 -0700

I have no info other than that which I am passing along here and have not
even looked at the web links.  But I thought you might find this
interesting.


-----Original Message-----
Sent: Friday, March 03, 2000 9:10 AM

An easier-to read, formatted, HTML version is normally available by 9AM
CT on the issue date at http://www.worldcongress.org/WCF/wcf_update.htm

Copyright ⌐ 2000 The Howard Center, All rights reserved

   World Congress of Families Update, Online!
                  6 March 2000
                Volume 01 Issue 01
             A Free Email Newsletter

[snip]

9. Family Research Abstract of the Week
 ôPublic officials concerned about studentsÆ bringing guns to school have

pushed hard for stricter gun-control laws.  Maybe they need to redirect
some of their activism into initiatives to pass tougher divorce-control
laws.  In a study recently completed at Indiana University - Purdue
University, Ft. Wayne, researcher David C. May identified family
structure
as a stronger predictor of carrying guns to high school in Mississippi, a

state with a particularly high rate of gun ownership.  data collected
from
about 5,000 students indicate that youth from single-parent or
ædisruptedÆ
families were æsignificantly more likely than their counterparts from
two-parent homes to carry firearms to school.Æ  What is more, this
linkage
between family structure and gun-carrying persists even in multi-variable

statistical models which take into account such things as æneighborhood
civility,Æ æfear of criminal victimization,Æ and æsocial control.Æö
(Source: David C. May, ôScared Kids, Unattached Kids, or Peer Pressure:
Why
Do Students Carry Firearms to School?ö Youth & Society, Vol. 31, No. 1
(September 1999), pp. 100-127.)
 You will find over 1,000 of similar research abstracts on the ôMembersö
section of The Howard Center web site at http://www.profam.org


==================================================================
Charles C. Hardy
Utah Coordinator--Women Against Gun Control
<[e-mail]>

-



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

From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fw: March 5 columns -- blame schools, not guns
Date: 06 Mar 2000 17:07:33 -0700

Thought some here might find this perspective interesting...


==================================================================
Charles C. Hardy
Utah Coordinator--Women Against Gun Control
<[e-mail]>

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

    FROM MOUNTAIN MEDIA
    EDITORS NOTE: A SHORTER VERSION, AT 850 WORDS, ALSO MOVES
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE DATED MARCH 5, 2000
    THE LIBERTARIAN, By Vin Suprynowicz
    Government schools: a deadly experiment


    It isn't really about race. It hardly suffices for the
"multiculturalists" that the children of successful black judges and
movie
stars now go peacefully to school with wealthy white kids (for which
equality under capitalism, let us give thanks.) Nor have they ever much
cared that the main victims of their racial quotas (at least here in the
West) turned out to be not "sons of slave-owners," but rather deserving
Asians, whose forebears were also an oppressed minority.

  No, the goal of the "multiculturalist" movement -- a goal so dominant
that even basic literacy is happily sacrificed -- is to infiltrate the
American middle class with the offspring of the liberals' "new
plantation,"
the fatherless welfare homes of our crime-infested inner cities.

  The result? A six-year-old boy -- passed from hand to hand since his
father was jailed for a home invasion and finally living in a fatherless
crack house full of drugs, stolen guns, and other loot -- shot a
first-grade classmate to death in Michigan this week.

  Such crimes occur only in the mandatory government schools. In private
schools -- where admission is selective and voluntary, and kids who stab
each other with pencils are expelled -- such horrors are virtually
unknown.
Nor do we see home-schoolers committing such crimes (though the statists
never tire of warning us home-schooled children will not be "properly
socialized"!)

  This tiny killer is not some innocent who picked up an unfamiliar
object
and brought it to "show-and-tell." While on parole in December, his
father,
Dedric Owens, asked the child why he had committed violent offenses that
led to his earlier suspensions from school -- suspensions at the age of
six.

  According to Genessee County Sheriff Robert Picknell, "He said that the
kid told him he did it because 'I hate them.' "

  Gee, where could the kid have copped that attitude, in a society where
whites who victimize blacks because of their skin color receive "hate
crime
sentence enhancements," while racism is hardly ever mentioned in the
prosecution of black murderers who declare "You're all white trash,
racist
pigs" (this week's guest quote courtesy of one Ronald Taylor, charged in
Wilkinsburg, Pa. in the shooting deaths of three white males -- two
others
critically wounded -- after he apparently grew upset that white workmen
worked too slowly repairing his broken door.)

  In the real world, tens of thousands more parents of children now
interned in these squalid government camps -- operated more and more on
the
model of penal institutions, complete with body searches and metal
detectors, properly preparing their little inmates for the police state
of
our future -- will now quietly move their kids into private schools, or
finally resolve to homeschool their children, regardless of the financial
sacrifice required.

  But since it's "politically incorrect," don't expect to hear about this
swelling tide on TV.

  Instead, the national whining will be the usual, "Whatever can we do to
rid ourselves of these dreaded guns?"

  The standard lie is that guns are more readily available and accepted
these days, when in fact child gunshot deaths have been dropping for
decades, and our nation is currently seized in a paroxysm of paranoia
about
these tools of freedom: Airport police now seizing the little plastic
guns
that come with Christmas G.I. Joe sets; while our banks (I mean Citibank,
subject of a national boycott by the Second Amendment Foundation after
closing the account of the Nevada Pistol Academy for being a "gun-related
business"), insurance companies (like the ones that now refuse fire and
liability coverage to Las Vegas pawn shops that deal in guns), fire
marshals (I refer to the guys who now seek to ban "Cheaper Than Dirt" for
selling ammo via mail-order out of Fort Worth, Tex., as that company has
done for years), and even national shipping firms (let's hypothetically
call one of them "UPS") either raise rates, cut off service, or threaten
to
arrest legal, licensed firearms dealers as though they were spreading the
bubonic plague.

  Imagine the public sitting similarly silent if such a full-court press
were now being applied to the First Amendment, making it progressively
harder for private churches or newspapers to stay in business.

  This in distinct contrast to the peaceful 1950s, when fewer than half
our
kids finished high school (no "drop-out crisis" perceived) and when
-- as recalled by retired Las Vegas auctioneer Robert Deiro -- the
basement
of Frazier Hall held an armory full of M-1 Garands and a rifle range used
for authorized practices and matches of Las Vegas High School's
award-winning rifle team.

  Gun control has been tried. In Australia, criminals now more confident
their victims will be disarmed have increased armed robberies by 44
percent.

  In England, where they finally finished banning civilian ownership of
handguns completely last year, staid London newspapers now dub industrial
Manchester "Gunchester," and the once proudly unarmed British bobbies
complain they're completely outgunned by youth gangs who now simply stock
up on fully-automatic AK-47 assault rifles, fresh out of the containers
in
which they arrive daily from Eastern Europe.

  To the extent that they do work, civilian gun bans lead to genocide, as
Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership have exhaustively
demonstrated. But apparently guns still make a handy voodoo doll in which
our statist media can stick their pins, in preference to focusing on the
real problem: the fact that fruitcake bureaucrats now control our
children's lives from ages 6 to 18.

  There, in keeping with the flawed 1930s notion that there exist "a
limited number of jobs" which must be protected for adult male heads of
household (the same justification employed to pressure "Rosie the
Riveter"
out of the workforce in 1946, and to set earnings limits on Social
Security
beneficiaries, which goofiness the House of Representatives finally voted
to overturn only this week) our children are rounded up, bored to tears,
and increasingly treated like dangerous inmates until they end up (start
ital)acting(end ital) like dangerous inmates.

  Take, for example, the reason I found myself talking to Mr. Deiro this
week. He called to explain how his son, Guy Robert Deiro, who now runs
the
family auction business (and who just finished a two-year stint as
president of the Boys and Girls Club of Henderson) decided to do a good
deed recently, hiring a 17-year-old kid from a fatherless Las Vegas home
to
work as a runner -- driving contracts around town -- in his after-school
hours, at $9 per hour.

  Because he hired the lad 28 days prior to his 17th birthday, the
younger
Mr. Deiro relates, the state Labor Department fined him $2,800 and
threatened to add penalties of 6 percent per day for any additional days
he
employed the young man, unless the lad took a mandated $3,000 commercial
driving course.

  "I had to let him go," Guy Robert Deiro explains. "He can't afford
$3,000
to go to some dumb driving school. In addition to the $9 an hour, I was
paying his car insurance, plus 21 cents a mile. I thought I was doing the
kid a favor -- frying hamburgers and french fries is more dangerous than
this job, and it was a way for him to learn the business, work his way
up.
It's absolutely absurd. It's big government getting in the way of people
trying to hire kids and show 'em a work ethic."

  Yet let some such lad eventually turn to a life of crime as the only
option left him by our meddlesome government masters, and what will we
hear?

  "How could this have happened? It must be the guns."


Vin Suprynowicz is assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas
Review-Journal. His book, "Send in the Waco Killers: Essays on the
Freedom
Movement, 1993-1998," is available by dialing 1-800-244-2224; or via web
site http://www.thespiritof76.com/wacokillers.html.

***


------
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].


-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: NRA Directors
Date: 07 Mar 2000 08:07:29 -0700

NRA voting members please take note.

-----

Please read through the following message.  It helps to explain why
the NRA Executive Vice President so strongly supports Orrin Hatch.
They both support the enactment of more gun control.

If you are a voting member of the NRA (as I am), register your
opposition by voting for those who are in the DO NOT VOTE FOR: list
in the political advertisement immediately preceding the ballot
package in the March magazine.  These 14 director candidates will
oppose the gun control agenda being pursued by the NRA.

Arnold

-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

                       GUN OWNERS ALLIANCE
                            !!ALERT!!
                    Chris W. Stark - Director
                          P.O. Box 1924
                    Crosby, Texas 77532-1924
             Ph. 1-281-787-4111  Fax [phone]
                    http://www.GOA-Texas.org
                 email: [e-mail]

                          04 March 2000
                       ++++++++++++++++++

    NRA E.V.P. Wayne LaPierre gives 2nd amendment rights away!

       ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
           Copyright ⌐ 2000 by http://www.NealKnox.com
        Republication permitted ONLY if this e-mail alert
               is left intact in its original state.
               +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


Just more hard proof of how we desperately need to elect staunch pro-gun
NRA Board of Directors that will not compromise our 2nd amendment rights
away. LaPierre & Heston need to be given their walking papers too. To voice
your disgust with NRA policies, first of all, VOTE the compromisers out by
going to http://www.goa-texas.org/BoD-1.htm then call the NRA and voice your
disgust at:

1-800-NRA-3888  or  1-703-267-1000  or e-mail: [e-mail]

Additional NRA abuses can be found at http://www.goa-texas.org/NRA.htm

Time to light up Congressional switchboards and apply the heat! For a list
of phone numbers for U.S. House of Representatives and Senators, go to:

http://www.gunowners.org/h106th.htm

http://www.gunowners.org/s106th.htm

With Respect,

Gun Owners Alliance
Chris W. Stark - Director

#  #  #  #  #  #  #  #  #  #


http://www.nealknox.com/alerts/msg00249.html

     March 4 Neal Knox Update - President Clinton has called a
meeting for Tuesday with Congressional leaders to demand passage of
his package of gun laws.

     On Wednesday, he was on the NBC Today show and CBS Dan Rather
declaring that NRA has a stranglehold on Congress and is opposed
to all gun laws.

     On Thursday, NRA E.V.P. Wayne LaPierre was on NBC Today
detailing what all new gun proposals NRA supported.  He listed last
June's House-approved gun package which included a requirement that
dealers sell trigger locks with each handgun, requiring NICS checks
on pawn shop redemption's, banning importation of over-10-round
magazines not included in the 1994 ban, prohibiting "unsupervised"
access by juveniles to "assault weapons" and high-cap magazines, a
lifetime ban on gun ownership for juveniles convicted of violent
offenses, and mandatory background checks on buyers from gun shows
table operators.

     While show host Katie Couric wasn't impressed by the list of
gun laws NRA supports,  NRA members lit up NRA's phones
and the Internet, insisting that many of those provisions violated
the Second Amendment.

     LaPierre informed Couric that it was the House Democrats, with
White House backing, who killed the entire gun package because it
didn't have Sen. Lautenberg's draconian gun show background check
bill -- which could kill gun shows due to its almost impossible-to-meet
requirements on show sponsors.

     Sen. Lautenberg, during a press conferences with Sens. Richard
Durbin and Charles Schumer this week, stated that his intent was to
eliminate gun shows entirely.  His amendment would go a long ways
toward that goal.

     With Clinton declaring that his trigger lock package would
have saved the First Grader killed in Michigan -- which is patently
ludicrous since the murder gun was stolen and found in a crack
house -- most of the focus of Tuesday's meeting is likely to be
directed toward trigger locks.

     Virginia Rep. Tom Davis, chairman of the Republican House
reelection effort, sponsored the amendment requiring handguns to be
sold with trigger locks or other security devices last June.  With
NRA's blessing, it passed 311-115.

     Gov. George Bush said Wednesday that if such a bill came to
his desk he would sign it, but he felt use of such devices should
be up to the homeowner.  He asked if advocates of requiring
trigger locks to be kept installed wanted Federal "trigger lock
police" to assure compliance.

     The sticking point in Clinton's package is, as it was last
June, the NRA-backed gun show amendment by Rep. John Dingell, which
would impose workable requirements on gun show promoters and allow
an "Instant Check" to take no more than 24 hours instead of
Lautenberg's five business days.

     Clinton is again unlikely to allow the NRA-backed package to
pass unless it has the NRA-opposed Lautenberg's gun show amendment,
for he wants to keep the gun issue alive, particularly "trigger
locks."

     However, if the press begins to report the political game-
playing over trigger locks, Clinton and the Republican leadership,
at least Speaker Dennis Hastert and Judiciary Chairman Henry
Hyde -- might yet agree to pass the trigger lock bill and the other
NRA-backed provisions.

     The reaction of other House Republicans, led by Majority
Leader Dick Armey and Whip Tom Delay, and the 40 or so pro-gun
Democrats, led by Rep. Dingell, is a bigger question.

     Clinton may well figure that he has more than enough other
pending gun law demands to take nine-tenths of a loaf now, but I
don't expect that to happen until he's had a few more months to
wring the maximum crocodile political tears out of trigger locks.

#  #  #  #  #

     Isn't it amazing that a reportedly recent Houston sharpened
screwdriver murder of one grade school kid by another has had no
national publicity?  And that this week's killing of two women by
three American kids who heaved large rocks off a highway overpass
in Germany, has gone almost unnoticed?


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
     Help Support the work of Gun Owners Alliance! Go to:

            http://www.goa-texas.org/members.htm
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Copyright ⌐ 2000 by Gun Owners Alliance (GOA-Texas). Republication
permitted ONLY if this e-mail alert is left intact in its original
state. The views herein do not necessarily reflect the views of
any other individual or organization, than Gun Owners Alliance
(GOA-Texas). We do not officially represent Gun Owners of America.
Go to http://www.goa-texas.org/TXsig.htm for more information.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
ONLY THE E-MAIL ADDRESS USED TO SEND US A SUBSCRIBE REQUEST, CAN BE
SUBSCRIBED. WE VERIFY THE AUTHENTICITY OF EVERY REQUEST.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
     TO SUBSCRIBE TO OUR E-MAIL ALERTS, send an e-mail to:

                      [e-mail]

....and in the body of the message, type the word "subscribe".
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
     TO UN-SUBSCRIBE TO OUR E-MAIL ALERTS, send an e-mail to:

                    [e-mail]

....and in the body of the message, type the word "UN-subscribe".
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.2 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
Comment: 'None Genuine Without This Signature'

iQEVAwUBOMGiQkMcuoA7aq7dAQFV/gf+K37gHZTpqRUUcKV+h9E8gmR93gXmt7AC
C68tYuy85eTTy+ofY2RwLzKhPLNnalHhMdhvzTapML8/nq2rGn40kLMR9C5frKBC
JRcM/1L1qJoDCD6yH+1BzEgEnwtLCL1oNG7X4ke4xHUP7dx5qFfO2qT0OgnArj1l
x6oMdVJIiVm3Tl3Q3fCO5NbGrEeqZtgjAhuxb1dWcy3h9KRZIcewGkEs/JRg01Zx
smTxNvaPzgD0+Ggtihn4pFzIA/noKY1L+7cZd6k/teA+j7a0dnWRTvHiWrGRhQoK
3XyTxShj7LVxEFgYnhFsIBLYLqLPoNubKW1+WFiM75MwcqfwpXjpSA==
=giUI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: HCI Conceals Data
Date: 07 Mar 2000 10:31:42 -0700

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

For Immediate Release: U.S. NewsWire -- Full National Circuit distribution
Text Length: 376 words

HCI Conceals Data to Mislead President, Press and Public on Child Deaths


President Clinton, using Handgun Control Inc. (HCI) figures, recently
asserted that "13 kids" are killed by guns each day in America. "That
statement is fraudulent," according to civil rights activist Aaron Zelman.
"Americans should demand full disclosure. WeÆre getting half-truths and
lies."

Documents obtained from HCI reveal the deception: the "13 kids" figure
includes people "ages 19 and under." Using that category, legal adults ages
18 and 19 are misleadingly counted as "kids." Zelman noted "if a salesman
sold you a home or car by giving you doctored information, then you could
sue him for fraud. HCI is steering Clinton to defraud Americans using trick
data."

Using the deceptive HCI figures, the Clinton administration claims that more
victim disarmament laws (euphemistically called "gun control") will save
young childrenÆs lives. Actual data from the National Center for Health
Statistics (NCSH) prove otherwise. Less than 0.3% of all victims of lethal
misuse of firearms were children under 5 years of age. Less than .07% of
the total deaths from firearms misuse were accident victims under age 5.

"Saying that toddlers are shooting one another with guns is an outright
lie," Zelman stated. "Americans prevent crimes about 5,500 times per day
using firearms. HCI is concealing that fact."

NCSH reported firearms-related deaths in America for 1997 totaling 32,436.
There were 9 victims under one year of age, 75 victims between one and four
years of age, and 546 victims between five and fourteen years of age. These
figures correspond to 0.03%, 0.23%, and 1.6%, respectively. "The true
figures show that over 98% of people killed by firearms misuse are not young
children," Zelman observed.

So-called "gun safety devices" can have little or no effect on firearms
misuse. Linda Gorman, a researcher at the Independence Institute, recently
concluded that "most of the proposed Æsafe storageÆ measures can be defeated
by 15-year-olds." Devices such as mandatory trigger locks would not "have
much effect on suicides or homicides in older age groups," Gorman noted.

Darrell Huff, author of How to Lie With Statistics, wrote that "a
well-wrapped statistic is better than HitlerÆs Æbig lieÆ; it misleads, yet
it cannot be pinned on you." Zelman vowed his organization would "pin
these false stats on the people who try to fool the American public."

--- 30 ---

-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: Cato Daily Dispatch - 3/8
Date: 09 Mar 2000 07:58:51 -0700

BAD AIM ON GUNS

President Clinton earned a strong rebuke from Sen. Orrin Hatch (R - Utah),
chairman of a House-Senate negotiating committee on gun control, after a
much publicized Oval Office meeting where the president pressured Congress
to act on gun legislation, according to The New York Times.
(http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/washpol/clinton-guns.html) "We're
poles apart on what can or cannot be done," Sen. Hatch said. He accused the
White House of trying to ban gun shows and refused to convene his committee.

Clinton renewed his call for gun restriction yesterday by releasing a
Justice Department study which claims that juvenile homicides and suicides
decline when youths have less access to guns, according to The Washington
Post (http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A22040-2000Mar6.html) "This
study shows the single best thing we can do to reduce juvenile violent crime
is to keep guns out of the hands of young people," said Bruce Reed,
Clinton's top domestic adviser.

Administration officials said House Republicans and Democrats possibly will
reach an accord on gun shows, which would put heavy pressure on the Senate
to join. They noted that in yesterday's meeting, the House GOP leader on the
issue, Rep. Henry J. Hyde (R - Illinois), sounded more conciliatory than
Hatch. Referring to the leader of the House Democratic conferees, Rep. John
Conyers Jr. (D - Michigan), Hyde told reporters: "John Conyers and I are
going to work hard to see what accommodation we can reach. . . . We can make
progress outside a formal conference meeting."

The GOP is showing signs of caving in once again and reaching an
"accommodation" with President Clinton and his agenda. In "The Facts About
Gun Shows," (http://www.cato.org/dailys/01-10-00.html) Associate Policy
Analyst David B. Kopel demonstrates that there is no "gun show loophole."
"Despite what some media commentators have claimed," he writes, "existing
gun laws apply just as much to gun shows as they do to any other place where
guns are sold." Attempts to shut down gun shows are simply further attacks
on the First and Second Amendments. In "Fighting Back: Crime, Self-Defense,
and the Right to Carry a Handgun,"
(http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-284es.html) Jeffrey R. Snyder disproves
many of the common misconceptions about handguns including the myth that
"more guns cause more violence."

-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: GOUtah! Alert #51 - 9 March 2000
Date: 09 Mar 2000 21:25:42 -0700

Gun Owners of Utah

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

Free GOUtah! Website: http://www.slpsa.org/goutah!
Free GOUtah! Telephone Alert Hotline: (801) 296-GUNS
Free GOUtah! Dedicated Fax Alert Requests: [phone]
Free GOUtah! E-Mail Alerts Requests: [e-mail]
Free GOUtah! E-Groups Alert Requests:
To Subscribe: Send a blank message to: [e-mail]
To Unsubscribe: Send a blank message to: [e-mail]

GOUtah! Alert #51 - 9 March 2000

Today's Voice of Liberty:

"If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything."--Randy Travis,

2000 UTAH LEGISLATIVE SESSION IS OVER! MASSIVE CAMPAIGN TO VETO SB72 BEGINS!

The 2000 Utah Legislative Session has ended, with gun owners suffering
minimal damage to their gun rights, due in large part to your effective
involvement in the mainstream political process. We'll have a full recap
of all the bills and voting records shortly.

One dangerous gun bill was slipped through literally at the last second.
SB 72-4th Substitute will deny lifetime gun rights to any individuals with
a civil commitment for any mental health needs whatsoever, including those
who might have suffered from mental exhaustion or depression and need a few
days of in-patient rest and medication, and for those have been fully cured
of their mental health problems.

We ask all Utah gun rights activists to Call Gov. Mike Leavitt TODAY at
[phone] and ask him to VETO HB 72-S4.

Governor Mike Leavitt
210 State Capitol
Salt Lake City, UT 84114
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]

GOV. LEAVITT RANCH OUTING CORRALS BIG CAMPAIGN BUCKS, INCLUDING FROM THE NRA

An excerpt from the Deseret News, 8 March 2000

Written by By Bob Bernick Jr., Deseret News Political Editor

"Gov. Mike Leavitt is one of the most successful fund-raisers in Utah
political history. But who would pay $10,000 a person to meet with him and
half a dozen other GOP governors?

That answer is now public with new filings of one of Leavitt's political
action committees. The $10,000-per-person fund-raiser was a two-day event
last September at the Leavitt family ranch outside Loa, Wayne County.

Some are the usual donors to Utah campaigns: Novell, Kennecott and Union
Pacific. In fact, Kennecott and one of its subsidiaries each gave $10,000.

But there are some new kids on the block, too.

The National Rifle Association gave $10,000 for the exclusive Sept. 24, 25
weekend that included fly fishing, hunting and singing around the campfire.
The governor was not the NRA's favorite person last summer as he advocated
for a special session on gun violence and school safety. But after
Republicans in the Utah House declined the special session, Leavitt, while
denying he was backing away from the controversial issue, didn't openly
speak out in favor of gun control during the 2000 session.

That issue, Leavitt says, will go to the people now via a citizen
initiative petition."

(GOUtah! Note: It would seem, even in light of all the strident anti-gun
efforts of Gov. Leavitt over the last 7 years, that the NRA is still
willing to toss a $10,000.00 donation at his reelection campaign to insure
4 more years of the same gun-banning agenda.)

REP. DAVE JONES CALLS IT QUITS - BLAMES UTAH'S GUN RIGHTS ACTIVISTS AND THE GOP.

Rep. Dave Jones, Utah House Minority leader, threw in the towel on his
decade long-legislative career this week, leaving the State Legislature due
to his lack of success in promoting his strident anti-gun agenda. He stated
that he was disgusted with both the GOP and with the pro-gun forces in
Utah, saying in a farewell press conference that "Any kook with e-mail can
stampede the herd," at the Utah Legislature.

No hard feelings in our saying good-bye, Dave. You were a most worthy
adversary in the political struggle to protect gun rights. We're sure there
are plenty more anti-gun politicians where you came from.

As for the 'gun rights wranglers', we'll keep expanding our communications
network, training pro-gun delegates, registering and educating pro-gun
voters, working with the media, and in general 'riding herd' on our gun
rights. We aim to deliver the herd without losing a single gun right to the
anti-gun wolves or civil rights rustlers.

Get along, little Davy, back to the bunkhouse.

PROVO POLICE TO USE TAX-FUNDED FEDERAL GRANT TO BUY CITIZEN'S GUNS FOR DESTRUCTION

Provo police intend to purchase guns from Utah residents next month with a
$21,000 taxpayer-funded federal grant. Police hope the gun buyback will
collect and destroy some 300 guns. Provo police seized a total of 13 guns
from criminals last year. Only three homicides involving guns were reported
in Provo from 1996 to 1999.

The gun buyback is part of a $2.4 million program recently launched by the
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to take citizen's
firearms off the streets. Funding of Provo's buyback project was made
possible by the Provo City Public Housing Authority, which diverted $15,000
of a HUD grant toward the plan. HUD added an additional $6,500 contribution.

Police will give a maximum gift certificate of $50 per gun. Provo's Police
Department is scheduled to host its gun buyback from 9 a.m. to noon March
11, and from 5 to 8 p.m. March 16, at the Eldred Center, 270 W. 500 North
in Provo. Sellers do not have to be Provo residents but will have to show
identification.

If you'd like to offer your thoughts about this abuse of both taxpayer
funds and the Second Amendments, please contact:

Mayor Lewis K. Billings
Provo City Hall
PO Box 1849
Provo, Utah 84603
Phone [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

Chief Greg Cooper
Provo City Police Department
PO Box 1849
Provo, Utah 84603
Phone [phone]

Provo City website: http://www.provo.org

PEDIATRICIANS TO QUESTION KIDS ABOUT GUNS

Pediatricians want to talk to your children about guns in your home during
routine checkups, following new guidelines from the American Academy of
Pediatrics. Doctors want to question both parents and children early and
often on issues like guns in the home, family stress and discipline.

Parents should be the main focus until children reach school age and are
old enough to communicate with their doctors, and the practice should
continue through adolescence, according to updated guidelines in the March
issue of the academy journal Pediatrics.

In a policy statement in the January 1999 issue of Pediatrics, pediatricians
were urged to take an active role in preventing youth violence. Pediatricians
in Utah have been at the forefront of the anti-gun crusade for several years.

For More Information: American Academy of Pediatrics site:
http://www.aap.org.

DOCTORS VS. GUN OWNERS: WHO'S SAFER?

from the Benton County News Tribune 17 November, 1999.

Consider the following statistics:

Number of physicians in the U.S.: 700,000

Accidental deaths caused by physicians per year: 120,000

Accidental deaths per physician: 0.171

Number of gun owners in the U.S.: 80,000,000

Number of accidental gun deaths per year (all age groups): 1,500

Accidental deaths per gun owner: 0.0000188

Therefore, are doctors approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners?

GOUTAH! GUN RIGHTS (AND WRONGS) QUOTE-WATCH

"I think it's going to be interesting, I have a gut feeling most of
these guns will be guns that maybe weren't operable. Is it a good idea?
Yeah. I think if a person doesn't feel comfortable with a gun in their
home, they ought to turn it in. But I think it will be interesting to see
what kinds of guns people turn in. Are we going to see any major assault
rifles? I don't know. Actually, I'm just dying to see the first one because
I don't know what to expect."

-- Provo Police Sgt. Lee Upchurch, assigned to oversee the gun buyback
program for the Provo City police, as quoted in the Deseret News.

GOUTAH! LEGISLATIVE INFORMATION OUTLETS

If you wish to be added to or taken off the GOUtah! Legislative Alerts
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 or removed from the GOUtah! list. There are no charges for
this service.

You can join the free GOUtah! E-Group. To Subscribe, send a blank message
to: [e-mail] To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
[e-mail]

You may also telephone the GOUtah! Information Hotline at (801) 296-GUNS
for the very latest information on issues surrounding your gun rights.
The call is toll free in the Salt Lake County/Davis County area, while
normal long distance charges apply for the rest of the state.

We strongly encourage you to forward, copy and share this information with
others, on the condition that you pass along the entire document intact and
unmodified, and that GOUtah! is clearly indicated as the original source of
the material, unless otherwise noted.

This concludes the GOUtah! Political and Legislative Alert #51 - 9 March 2000.

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 2000 by GOUtah! All rights reserved.

To Subscribe, send a blank message to: [e-mail]
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: [e-mail]

eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/goutah
http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications

-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: LEG-ALERTS 3-9: Good News!
Date: 09 Mar 2000 22:02:20 -0700

MORE GOOD NEWS!

Senate President Lane Beattie has announced his retirement from the
Utah Senate! Beattie, long known as Gov. Leavitt's alter-ego in the
Senate, is known for his ardent support of gun control.

Two years ago, Utah gun rights advocates forced Beattie to call a
press conference to announce he was killing his gun control bill,
SB 57. This year we did it again, and Beattie again called a press
conference to announce he was killing SB 161 and 162. These awful
bills would have provided for government-mandated harassment of gun
owners in schools and churches. They would also have needlessly
endangered our children and all religious people. Advertising to
criminals that schools and churches are "free-fire" zones, where
criminals can attack without fear of being stopped, is a dangerously
stupid idea!

While Beattie didn't give credit to "kooks with guns" for his
retirement, UTGuns is glad he's finally learned his lesson.

So, Senate President Lane Beattie is gone. Senate Minority Leader
Scott Howell is widely rumored to be considering retiring. House
Minority Leader Dave Jones is retiring. (Yes, we're aware that all
of them will likely seek higher office. We'll deal with that when
the time comes!)

Who's left? Speaker of the House Marty Stephens. The man who
"considered" challenging Mike Leavitt, and ended up ENDORSING him!
The man who claims he "didn't know anything" about his own Majority
Leader's major gun control bill! (Kevin Garn's HB 372) The "powerful
leader" who let the unconstitutional SB 72 pass the House with less
than a minute to spare!

UTGuns sincerely hopes that Speaker Stephens will listen to the pleas
of citizens outraged at the deceitful way in which this bill "passed"
the legislature - after midnight, without an opportunity for legislators
to read and understand what they were voting for, and with USSC lobbyist,
Rob Bishop assuring everyone that it was a "good" bill - and that he will
do everything possible to encourage Gov. Leavitt to veto SB 72.

See http://www.sltrib.com/03092000/utah/32279 for info on Beattie's retirement.

-



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

From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: REMINDER  Presidential Primary today, Friday, March 10
Date: 10 Mar 2000 11:11:15 -0700

Today (Friday March 10) is Utah's first ever Presidential Primary
Election.  Polls are open until 8:00 pm.

You must already be registered to vote.  Registered Republicans may not
vote in the Democratic Primary.  Registered Democrats may not vote in the
Republican Primary.  Those registered voters who have not declared party
affiliation (90%) may vote in the primary of any ONE party.

Please do not forgo voting simply because the results seem all but
certain.

Rather, view this as an opportunity to cast a completely honest vote,
without fear of "wasting" that vote or "spoiling" an election in favor of
the worse of two evils,  for whichever candidate you believe will best
preserve your rights, including your right to an effective, armed
defense.

==================================================================
Charles C. Hardy
Utah Email Coordinator--Women Against Gun Control
<[e-mail]>

-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: AMA Gun Poll
Date: 12 Mar 2000 15:16:02 -0700

-----

That the American Medical Association is actively working for gun control
is not news. Interestingly enough, there is a poll on their Web site re:
gun bans, and we're kicking the anti-gun/anti-self-defense people's butts.
Pitch in: http://www.ama-assn.org/sci-pubs/msjama/index.htm

-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: New Fed Gun Bill?
Date: 14 Mar 2000 22:16:59 -0700

Weird formatting in original.

-----

This just sent to me. I have no idea if it's real.  If true, it';s just
another good reason to abolish the IRS.

----------
S 2099 IS

106th CONGRESS

2d Session

S. 2099

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to require the registration of
handguns, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

February 24, 2000

Mr. REED introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred
to the Committee on Finance



A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to require the registration of
handguns, and for other purposes.

  Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

  This Act may be cited as the `Handgun Safety and Registration Act of
2000'.

SEC. 2. REGISTRATION OF HANDGUNS.

  (a) HANDGUN INCLUDED IN DEFINITION OF FIREARM-

  (1) IN GENERAL- Section 5845(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
(defining firearm) is amended by striking `and (8) a destructive device'
and inserting `(8) a handgun; and (9) a destructive device'.

  (2) DEFINITION OF HANDGUN- Section 5845 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 (relating to definitions) is amended by adding at the end the
following:

  `(n) HANDGUN-

  `(1) IN GENERAL- The term `handgun' means any weapon (including a
starter gun) which--

  `(A) is designed to or may be readily converted to expel a projectile
by the action of an explosive, and

  `(B) has a short stock and is designed to be held and fired by the use
of a single hand.

  `(2) DISASSEMBLED PARTS INCLUDED- Such term shall also include the
frame or receiver of any such weapon, and any combination of parts from
which a handgun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or
under the control of a person.

  `(3) EXCLUSION- Such term shall not include a firearm classified as
`any other weapon' under subsection (e).'.

  (b) TRANSFER TAX IMPOSED ON HANDGUNS- Section 5811(a) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to rate) is amended by inserting `or as a
handgun under section 5845(a)(8)' after `section 5845(e)'.

  (c) TAX ON MAKING FIREARMS IMPOSED ON HANDGUNS- Section 5821(a) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to rate) is amended by inserting
`, except, the tax on any firearm classified as a handgun under section
5845(a)(8) shall be at the rate of $50 for each such firearm made' after
`firearm made'.

  (d) IMPORTATION POLICY CONTINUED-

  (1) IN GENERAL- Section 5844 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
(relating to importation) is amended by adding at the end the following:
`This section shall not apply to any firearm classified as a handgun
under section 5845(a)(8).'.

  (2) CONFORMING AMENDMENT- Section 925(d)(3) of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by inserting `(without regard to paragraph (8) thereof)'
after `section 5845(a)'.

  (e) SHARING OF REGISTRATION INFORMATION WITH STATE AND LOCAL LAW
ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES-

  (1) IN GENERAL- Section 6103(o) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
(relating to disclosure of returns and return information with respect to
certain taxes) is amended by adding at the end the following:

  `(3) TAXES IMPOSED ON TRANSFER OF HANDGUNS- Returns and return
information with respect to taxes imposed by part II of subchapter A of
chapter 53 (relating to tax on transferring firearms) on any firearm
classified as a handgun under section 5845(a)(8) shall be available in an
on-line format for inspection by or disclosure to officers and employees
of--

  `(A) any Federal law enforcement agency, and

  `(B) any State or local law enforcement agency,

whose official duties require such inspection or disclosure.'.

  (2) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS- Section 6103(p)(4) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 is amended--

  (A) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A)--

  (i) by striking `or (o)(1)' and inserting `(o)(1), or (o)(3)(A)',

  (ii) by striking `or (l)(6)'  and inserting `(l)(6)',

  (iii) by inserting `or (o)(3)(B),' after `(16),', and

  (B) in subparagraph (F)(i)--

  (i) by striking `or (l)(6)'  and inserting `(l)(6)', and

  (ii) by inserting `or (o)(3)(B),' after `(16),', and

  (C) in subparagraph (F)(ii), by striking `or (o)(1)'  and inserting `,
(o)(1), or (o)(3)(A)'.

  (f) TRANSITION RULE FOR NONREGISTERED HANDGUNS-

  (1) IN GENERAL- Any person possessing any firearm classified as a
handgun under section 5845(a)(8) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 not
registered in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record
maintained by the Secretary of the Treasury under section 5841 of such
Code shall register such handgun--

  (A) within 1 year of the date of the enactment of this Act, or

  (B) upon the transfer of such handgun before such 1 year anniversary
date.

  (2) TREATMENT OF REGISTRATION AS TRANSFER- For purposes of any tax
imposed by part II of subchapter A of chapter 53 of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 (relating to tax on transferring firearms) on any firearm
classified as a handgun under section 5845(a)(8) of such Code, any
registration of such handgun under paragraph (1)(A) shall be considered a
transfer of such handgun.

  (3) NONAPPLICATION OF PENALTY- Section 5861(d) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 shall not apply with respect to the possession of any
handgun before the date of the registration of such handgun under
paragraph (1).

  (g) PROVISION OF REGISTRATION FORMS-

  (1) AVAILABILITY- To promote and assist compliance with the handgun
registration requirements under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended by this section, the Secretary of the Treasury shall make
available such registration and fingerprint forms as may be required by
the public for compliance with such requirements--

  (A) to State and local law enforcement agencies and facilities of the
Department of the Treasury throughout the States, the United States
Postal Service, and such other agencies and departments of the Federal
Government as the Secretary determines would aid in making such forms
available to the public; and

  (B) through the Internet in a downloadable format.

  (2) SINGLE FORM- The Secretary of the Treasury shall make available
registration forms that allow an individual to register the possession or
transfer of more than 1 firearm classified as a handgun under section
5845(a)(8) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 on a single form.

  (h) PROGRAM OF PUBLIC AWARENESS- Within 60 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Treasury shall commence a
program to broaden public awareness of the handgun registration
requirements under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended by this
section. Such program may include voluntary cooperative efforts with
Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies and public service
announcements as deemed appropriate by the Secretary.

  (i) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS- There are authorized to be
appropriated such sums as may be necessary for the Secretary of the
Treasury to carry out the provisions of and amendments made by this Act.

  (j) EFFECTIVE DATE- The amendments made by this section shall take
effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.

END

-



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

From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fw: March 12 column -- gun rights
Date: 15 Mar 2000 17:14:49 -0700


==================================================================
Charles C. Hardy
Utah Email Coordinator--Women Against Gun Control
<[e-mail]>

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


    FROM MOUNTAIN MEDIA
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE DATED MARCH 12, 2000
    THE LIBERTARIAN, By Vin Suprynowicz
    Thugs still reign in Taxachusetts


    At midday Wednesday, March 1, a 53-year-old Registered Nurse
Anaesthetist with the same name as actress Linda Hamilton -- a
grandmother
who's been licensed by the commonwealth to carry a handgun for the past
10
years (fingerprints, FBI check, etc.) was headed eastbound on Route 2
through the village of North Adams.

  "At which point I noticed an 18-wheeler looming in my rearview mirror,"
Ms. Hamilton writes. "He drove up to within 10 feet of my Blazer, and
then
lunged his truck at my vehicle as if he was going to ram it. He pulled
out
as if to pass me -- we were on a two-lane road -- and then pulled back in
behind me. He repeated this behavior four times.

  "I was in fear for my life. For over a quarter mile there is no place
to
pull over. There were no other people around."

  So, Hamilton took out the snubnosed .38 Rossi she's licensed by the
state
to carry. "I put it in my right hand and put my hand back on the steering
wheel. The truck driver immediately backed off. I pulled in at the first
place there were  people and a pay phone. I called the Shelburne State
Police barracks and told them of the incident, thinking, of course, that
they could intercept the trucker before he hurt someone.

  "As soon as I mentioned what I had done with my gun, I was put on the
defensive by the officer on the phone. Instead of thanking me for
handling
the situation in a responsible way, which protected me and hurt no one,
the
issue suddenly became the gun and only the gun, and not the fact that
lives
were in jeopardy from an out-of-control trucker. The trooper said to me,
'You should not have drawn your gun; a complaint could be filed.' "

  "Excuuuse me," Ms. Hamilton writes, "but why on earth am I carrying a
gun? To keep my hip warm?"

  The cops know who the trucker was, but won't tell Linda Hamilton or her
husband Russ. Instead, a couple of lady troopers named Robertson and
Curran
flagged Ms. Hamilton down, asked her permission to search her vehicle,
searched it anyway when she refused permission, found and seized her
legally licensed revolver.

  Fortunately, Russ Hamilton tells me Massachusetts (unlike many states)
has no easily misinterpreted law against "brandishing" a weapon. The Gun
Owners Action League referred the Hamiltons to attorney Robert Chesbro in
Williamstown. The Hamiltons plan to sue the state for assault and battery
(Mrs. Hamilton was frisked without evidence of any crime), theft of her
revolver (which the police still have) and concealing the name of the
truck
driver who started the whole thing.

  "I put them on notice they were leaving me defenseless, and that I
wanted
a police escort home," Mrs. Hamilton adds. "They refused."

  Taxachusetts, of course, has so far abandoned the tradition of
Lexington
and Concord (where Redcoat efforts to seize civilian arms were not well
received) that their welcoming billboards now read: "Have A Gun, Go To
Jail."

  While Russ Hamilton says the cops are dead wrong -- "Under
Massachusetts
law you can keep a loaded firearm in your vehicle if you're a licensed
owner; you can have it taped to the window if you so desire," he also
admits: "We stopped one mile short. We found a piece of land we liked,
but
it's one mile short of Vermont. In Vermont there are no gun laws
whatsoever, and it has the lowest crime rate in the U.S. We kick
ourselves
in the butt that we missed it by one mile."

  Tina Terry offers more -- including a photostat of Linda Hamilton's
handgun permit -- at www.sierratimes.com/artt030600.htm.

  Meantime, maybe the Second Amendment isn't dead in courts, after all.

  The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals -- which overturned the original
"gun-free school zones" law -- has announced it will hear oral arguments
this spring in the Emerson case.

  Federal Judge Sam Cummings of the Northern District of Texas last year
dismissed an indictment against Timothy Joe Emerson for possession of a
firearm while under a temporary restraining order routinely issued during
his divorce case. In doing so, Judge Cummings specifically rejected the
government's claim that the Second Amendment is some kind of "collective"
right pertaining only to the National Guard.

  Judge Cummings' ruling refutes the bogus "collective rights" theory,
and
demonstrates in detail why the individual-right interpretation,
significantly known as the "Standard Model" in the academic literature
and
now embraced even by liberals like Harvard's Laurence Tribe, is proper.

  Specifically, Judge Cummings ruled that the subordinate "militia"
clause
in no way negates or limits the independent "right of the people" clause,
and further notes the U.S. Supreme Court has determined "the people"
should
be interpreted similarly in the First, Second, Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth
amendments.

  "This decision helps protect gun owners from the ever-increasing
classes
of people prohibited from gun ownership," comments Alan Gottlieb, head of
the Second Amendment Foundation. "Without a court willing to step in and
put a halt to this practice, eventually anyone with a parking or speeding
ticket could be prevented from gun ownership. This could be the pure
Second
Amendment case that gun owners have been praying for over the past
half-century."

  More details: www.saf.org/EmersonViewOptions.html.


Vin Suprynowicz is assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas
Review-Journal. His book, "Send in the Waco Killers: Essays on the
Freedom
Movement, 1993-1998," is available at $24.95 postpaid by dialing
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].


________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

-



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

From: "David Sagers" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Any Chance
Date: 15 Mar 2000 17:28:45 -0700

Hi Charles

Any chance you are going to run against Trish Beck?


-



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

From: "Karl Pearson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Humor: On The Beat
Date: 15 Mar 2000 17:36:46 -0700

Not all are funny, but they weren't necessarily meant to be. (thp)


Things Overheard While on the Beat
--source unknown

"The more we sweat in training, the less we bleed on the streets."

"Your life is not my fault."

"The handcuffs are tight because they're new. They'll stretch out after you
wear them awhile."

"Take your hands off the car and I'll make your birth certificate a
worthless document."

"Remember, when you gotta cuff 'em, nobody is your friend."

"If you run, you'll only go to jail tired."

"That says POLICE, not taxi!"

"Can you run faster than 1200 feet per second?"

"So you don't know how fast you were going. I guess that means I can write
anything I want on the ticket, huh?"

"You can't outrun a radio."

"Yes, sir, you can talk to the shift supervisor, but I don't think it will
help. Oh, did I mention that I am the shift supervisor?"

"Someone, somewhere is practicing. If you're not, and someday, if you
should meet, you will lose."

"Every dog has it's day. Good dogs have two."

"Warning! You want a warning? Okay, I'm warning you not to do that again or
I'll give you another ticket."

"I'd rather have the gear and not need it than need the gear I don't have."

"If its worth stopping, its worth writing."

"The answer to this last question will determine whether you are drunk or
not. Was Mickey Mouse a cat or a dog?"

"Fair? You want me to be fair? Listen, fair is a place where you go to ride
on rides, eat cotton candy, and step in monkey poop."

"Listen with your ears, not with your mouth."

"Some people are meant to be cops, and some people are meant to call the
cops."

"God made tomorrow for the crooks we don't catch today."

"God must love stupid people, 'cause he sure made a lot of them."

"Life's tough. It's tougher if you're stupid."

"Bulletproof vests aren't."

"Law abiding citizens sleep peacefully in their beds, solely because,
dedicated men and women stand ready to do violence in their behalf."

"In God we trust, all others we run NCIC."

"Just how big were those two beers?"

"Uh ... yes, Chief, it only appeared as if I wasn't paying attention to
your speech. Actually, you inspired me to meditate on the mission statement
and envision a new paradigm."

"No, sir, we don't have quotas anymore. We used to have quotas but now
we're allowed to write as many tickets as we want."

"Law enforcement is not a spectator sport."

"There are multiple copies here. You need to press down firmly when signing
at the bottom of the ticket."

"I know, I know! Your kid is an honor student at the juvenile detention
center."

"I'm glad to hear the chief of police is a good personal friend of yours.
At least you know someone who can post your bail."

"You might beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride."

"We don't hire cops in this department, we hire common sense and make cops
from it."

"Shoot them until they think they're dead."

"I don't believe they should use the electric chair, they need to use
electric bleachers."

"Handcuffs aren't designed for comfort."

"Your arrest. You catch 'em, you clean 'em."

"No, Chief, I swear ... it was my day off."

"There are no dress rehearsals, and this is the big time."


-



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

From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Any Chance
Date: 15 Mar 2000 17:37:58 -0700

Hadn't considered it yet.  For what office is she running?

On Wed, 15 Mar 2000 17:28:45 -0700 "David Sagers"
<[e-mail]> writes:
> Hi Charles
>
> Any chance you are going to run against Trish Beck?
>
>
> -
>

==================================================================
Charles C. Hardy
Utah Email Coordinator--Women Against Gun Control
<[e-mail]>

________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

-



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

From: "David Sagers" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Any Chance
Date: 15 Mar 2000 17:46:07 -0700

She is the State Rep in our area.  She is a Scott Howell liberal, and made =
an interesting statement in a committee meeting "...if people aren't =
responsible enough to pay their traffic tickets, they aren't responsible =
enough to have guns." =20

Obviously not someone who will protect our rights.


-



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

From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Any Chance
Date: 15 Mar 2000 18:05:42 -0700

Actually, I notice she is running in District 48.  Art Haddow is running
as a Republican against her.  I live in District 50.  Llyod Frandsen is
not seeking re-elction, deciding instead to run for Senate Seat 5.  Drew
Chamberlain is one of several Republicans running for his open seat.

On Wed, 15 Mar 2000 17:46:07 -0700 "David Sagers"
<[e-mail]> writes:
> She is the State Rep in our area.  She is a Scott Howell liberal, and
> made an interesting statement in a committee meeting "...if people
> aren't responsible enough to pay their traffic tickets, they aren't
> responsible enough to have guns."
>
> Obviously not someone who will protect our rights.
>
>
> -
>

==================================================================
Charles C. Hardy
Utah Email Coordinator--Women Against Gun Control
<[e-mail]>

________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

-



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

From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: GOA media advisory
Date: 15 Mar 2000 18:32:01 -0700

GOA Blasts Clinton and Gun Control on Prime Time TV
   -- Exposes problems with enforcing anti-gun laws

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


"I can tell you that the President of the United States is certainly
eager to take advantage of every tragedy that occurs.  And to
suggest that, somehow, a crack-house kid would have had a
trigger-lock on the gun that the crook in the house had with their
drugs and stolen guns -- I don't think so.  That's a very
implausible scenario to say the least."
   -- Larry Pratt, GOA Executive Director on MSNBC's Equal Time


(Wednesday, March 15, 2000) -- Last week it was the morning TV
programs like NBC's Today show and CBS' This Morning.  This week,
GOA Executive Director Larry Pratt has been hitting the after-dinner
talk shows.

Pratt appeared on MSNBC's Equal Time last night with co-hosts Ollie
North and Paul Begala.  Sparks flew as Pratt excoriated the
President for using horrible tragedies to further his political
agenda.

At the same time, Pratt also blasted the President's call to
"enforce the existing [anti-]gun laws."

"Rather than call for the enforcement of existing gun laws -- which
all of us opposed at the time that they were being put on the
books," Pratt said, "we think it would be much more appropriate to
call for their removal.  That way we're not going to have as many
people being disarmed and victimized by criminals who get their guns
anyway no matter what the gun control laws are."

Pratt pointed out how foolish the gun control logic is.  A virtual
complete gun ban and confiscation in England has now led to a rising
crime rate (which has now surpassed our own).  And their ban has not
stopped more than 3 million guns from reportedly landing in
criminals' hands.

"Are we supposed to believe that if on an island they can't keep
guns out of the hands of criminals, that the Brady law is somehow
going to keep guns out of the hands of criminals?" Pratt said.

Pratt also blasted an HCI spokesman on the show for calling on
Congress to close the gun control "loopholes."

"What you're calling a 'loophole' is what the Founders called
freedom," said Pratt.  "And meanwhile, all these 'loopholes' you
want to close off -- all they do is result in an increase in crime
in this country."

GOA plans to offer this tape in the future for a minimal cost.  Gun
activists who would like to see a first class debater take on our
political enemies will find lots of talking points that they can
use.

MEDIA ADVISORY:  As this goes to press, Larry Pratt is scheduled to
appear on CNBC's [Geraldo] Rivera Live tonight at 9:00 EST.  As with
any media "schedule," such plans are always tentative and could be
changed at any time by the media host.

HOUSE VOTE:  GOA will alert you tomorrow as to the results of the
House vote which occurred today.  It is imperative that we defeat
the gun control in the crime bill now -- otherwise, today's
restrictions will become part of the "existing gun laws" that the
President and others will be seeking to enforce tomorrow.


**************
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.

==================================================================
Charles C. Hardy
Utah Email Coordinator--Women Against Gun Control
<[e-mail]>

________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

-



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

From: Karl Pearson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Quote of the Ages
Date: 15 Mar 2000 23:20:26 -0700 (Mountain Standard Time)

"Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est."
("A sword is never a killer, it's a tool in the killer's hands.")
--Lucius Annaeus Seneca "the Younger" (ca. 4 BC-65 AD)
epistulae ad Lucilium 87, c. 30


-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: LEG-ALERTS 3-15: URGENT ASSISTANCE NEEDED!
Date: 16 Mar 2000 10:57:16 -0700

Help kill SB 72
Candidates needed!
Delegates still needed!
Sarah Thompson, Arnold Gaunt on KTKK Thursday


HELP KILL SB 72!

SB 72 - Restricted persons (Terry Spencer) is still alive! It is
currently sitting on Gov. Leavitt's desk, awaiting his signature.
We need to encourage him to veto it - and encourage legislators
to support our effort.

SB 72, which was pushed by the Leavitt administration, is an awful bill.
It is an unconstitutional ex post facto bill, which applies retroactive
punishment for events that happened years ago. It revokes gun rights for
juveniles who have been adjudicated delinquent without a jury trial. It
expands the current prohibitions on handgun possession to include long
guns. It re-enacts the lifetime ban on firearms possession for anyone who
has been committed to a mental institution, again without a jury trial or
even due process - even if the commitment was wrongful or the person has
recovered. It also re-enacts the lifetime ban on possession for anyone
dishonorably discharged from the military - even for political or social
offenses. And most ominously, it provides a mechanism to revoke firearms
rights for MISDEMEANOR offenses.

As if this isn't bad enough, some outrageous lies were told in order to
get the bill passed. Legislators reported they were told that if the bill
wasn't passed, Utah would automatically be subject to a federal five-day
waiting period for all firearms transactions. Of course the federal
five-day waiting period expired in 1998, and was replaced with the
National Instant-Check System (NICS). Utahns are already subject to NICS
checks. The "five day waiting period" lie was perpetrated solely to scare
legislators into voting for a gun control bill. Sadly, it worked.

And to make matters even worse, many witnesses report that the bill passed
the Senate AFTER midnight - which makes it unconstitutional and void.

WE NEED HELP TO KILL SB 72 - and we need it NOW!
Gov. Leavitt can sign it at any time!

Several activists (Arnold Gaunt, Brent Odenwalder and Sarah Thompson)
met with House leadership today. (Reps. Marty Stephens, Kevin Garn,
David Ure and Greg Curtis) UTGuns appreciates their willingness to
meet and discuss this problem. Speaker Stephens says that he is "still
waiting to hear from Gov. Leavitt". Leadership did not seem inclined
to try to kill the bill based on its content, or the blatant lies told
to obtain passage. While they did vote against the bill, this attitude
raises questions about the sincerity of their opposition.

However, they did state that if the bill was indeed passed after
midnight, they would support invalidating it on that basis.

1. Please CALL each of these members of House Leadership AS SOON AS
POSSIBLE! Time is very short, and the bill can be signed at any time.
Ask them to do EVERYTHING possible to stop Gov. Leavitt from signing
the bill. Legislators do not read email when they're not in session
so you need to CALL or FAX them!
Speaker Marty Stephens
801-538-1930 (Capitol)
801-731-5346 (Home)
801-538-1908 (Fax)
Majority Leader Kevin Garn
801-544-3533 (Home)
801-776-0232 (Office)
801-776-0214 (Fax)
Majority Whip David Ure
435-783-4650 (Home)
435-783-2487 (Office)
435-783-4650 (Fax)
Ass't. Majority Whip Greg Curtis
801-943-3091 (Home)
801-569-5141 (Office)

Remember to be polite but assertive. Don't let them play games with OUR RIGHTS!

2. Call Governor Leavitt! 801-538-1000 Let him (or the staff person
handling bill signing and vetos) know that you would like the governor
to VETO SB 72 for the above reasons. Please remind Gov. Leavitt that
allowing SB 72 to become law guarantees a vote for one of his four
(current) challengers.

3. Witnesses needed!
Were you at the Capitol the night of March 1? Did you witness legislators,
lobbyists and others lying about SB 72? Did you watch the vote in the Senate?
If so, it is ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT that you contact the five people listed
above. We also need a signed, notarized affidavit stating clearly what you
saw and heard. (Contact Sarah at this address or 801-566-1067 for details.)


CANDIDATES NEEDED!

Our legislators have a dismal record of protecting our rights this year.
No Representative has a voting record better than 60%. No Senator has a
record better than 44%! This is simply not acceptable. (It is important
to remember that voting records do not reflect committee votes or
back-room politics, so they should not be considered an absolute measure
of a legislator's behavior. But these numbers are so terrible that it's
hard to make a case that we have any pro-rights legislators.)

Volunteers are desperately needed to challenge some of these folks
so they don't come back for another 2-4 years! We need YOU to file
for office! Even if you don't have the time and money to mount a
major campaign, just the fact that you file has beneficial effects:
1. The legislator finds out that not everyone approves of what he's doing.
2. The legislator actually has to do some work instead of just showing up
to claim his seat. Even if he wins, you will have caused him pain, expense,
and embarrassment - and he'll be motivated not to let that happen again!
3. By expressing a strong pro-liberty point of view, you will "pull" the
incumbent towards a pro-liberty point of view. You will also educate others
in your district who will then become your allies in preserving our rights.

A list of people who have filed to date can be found at:
http://www.governor.state.ut.us/lt_gover/2000candidates.html
If there are no good candidates in your House or Senate district,
please consider running! The filing fees are low (less than $20 for
a House seat!), and you'll automatically get a delegate spot at the
county (or state if you're in a multi-county district) convention.
Filing deadline is Friday 5 PM. You lose nothing by filing;
you can always withdraw if you change your mind.


DELEGATES NEEDED!
Response to the UTGuns request for delegates is still not what it should
be. MANY more people are needed to volunteer to be delegates! Isn't it
worth a day or two of your time to make sure that good candidates are
elected? Do you really WANT Mike Leavitt pushing gun control for another
four years? Did YOUR legislators do an exemplary job of protecting your
life, liberty and property? No? Then volunteer to be a delegate! This is
the best (maybe only!) way to promote responsible government.

Even if you have signed up on another list of delegates, please sign
the UTGuns list too! We are not "competing" with anyone else for names.
We are trying to compile a central list of names of people willing to
support some real pro-gun candidates.

For more information, or to sign up, go to:
http://www.utguns.freeservers.com/volunteer.html


RADIO ALERT!
Sarah Thompson and Arnold Gaunt will be appearing on Radio Liberty
on Thursday, March 16 from 5-7 PM. Radio Liberty is hosted by Jim
Dexter, and can be found on KTKK, 630 AM. Topics include SB 72,
legislative liars, gun bills in general, and delegate recruitment.
Please listen and call in!
Salt Lake County, 801-254-5855.
North of SLCo, 801-670-5855
South of SLCo, 801-470-5855

Thanks!
Sarah

-



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

From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: UTGuns Leg Alert 3-15:  URGENT YOUR HELP NEEDED NOW
Date: 16 Mar 2000 11:54:47 -0700

Everyone, please take the time to read through this one and respond
appropriately.

Help kill SB 72
Candidates needed!
Delegates still needed!
Sarah Thompson, Arnold Gaunt on KTKK Thursday


HELP KILL SB 72!

SB 72 - Restricted persons (Terry Spencer) is still alive!  It is
currently sitting on Gov. Leavitt's desk, awaiting his signature.  We
need to encourage him to veto it - and encourage legislators to support
our effort.

SB 72, which was pushed by the Leavitt administration, is an awful bill.
It is an unconstitutional ex post facto bill, which applies retroactive
punishment for events that happened years ago.  It revokes gun rights for
juveniles who have been adjudicated delinquent without a jury trial.  It
expands the current prohibitions on handgun possession to include long
guns.  It re-enacts the lifetime ban on firearms possession for anyone
who has been committed to a mental institution, again without a jury
trial or even due process - even if the commitment was wrongful or the
person has recovered.  It also re-enacts the lifetime ban on possession
for anyone dishonorably discharged from the military - even for political
or social offenses.  And most ominously, it provides a mechanism to
revoke firearms rights for MISDEMEANOR offenses.

As if this isn't bad enough, some outrageous lies were told in order to
get the bill passed.  Legislators reported they were told that if the
bill wasn't passed, Utah would automatically be subject to a federal
five-day waiting period for all firearms transactions.  Of course the
federal five-day waiting period expired in 1998, and was replaced with
the National Instant-Check System (NICS).  Utahns are already subject to
NICS checks.  The "five day waiting period" lie was perpetrated solely to
scare legislators into voting for a gun control bill.  Sadly, it worked.

And to make matters even worse, many witnesses report that the bill
passed the Senate AFTER midnight - which makes it unconstitutional and
void.

WE NEED HELP TO KILL SB 72 - and we need it NOW!  Gov. Leavitt can sign
it at any time!

Several activists (Arnold Gaunt, Brent Odenwalder and Sarah Thompson) met
with House leadership today.  (Reps. Marty Stephens, Kevin Garn, David
Ure and Greg Curtis)  UTGuns appreciates their willingness to meet and
discuss this problem.
Speaker Stephens says that he is "still waiting to hear from Gov.
Leavitt".  Leadership did not seem inclined to try to kill the bill based
on its content, or the blatant lies told to obtain passage.  While they
did vote against the bill, this attitude raises questions about the
sincerity of their opposition.

However, they did state that if the bill was indeed passed after
midnight, they would support invalidating it on that basis.

1. Please CALL each of these members of House Leadership AS SOON AS
POSSIBLE!  Time is very short, and the bill can be signed at any time.
Ask them to do EVERYTHING possible to stop Gov. Leavitt from signing the
bill.  Legislators do not read email when they're not in session so you
need to CALL or FAX them!
Speaker Marty Stephens
801-538-1930 (Capitol)
801-731-5346 (Home)
801-538-1908 (Fax)
Majority Leader Kevin Garn
801-544-3533 (Home)
801-776-0232 (Office)
801-776-0214 (Fax)
Majority Whip David Ure
435-783-4650 (Home)
435-783-2487 (Office)
435-783-4650 (Fax)
Ass't. Majority Whip Greg Curtis
801-943-3091 (Home)
801-569-5141 (Office)

Remember to be polite but assertive.  Don't let them play games with OUR
RIGHTS!

2. Call Governor Leavitt!  801-538-1000  Let him (or the staff person
handling bill signing and vetos) know that you would like the governor to
VETO SB 72 for the above reasons.  Please remind Gov. Leavitt that
allowing SB 72 to become law guarantees a vote for one of his four
(current) challengers.

3. Witnesses needed!
Were you at the Capitol the night of March 1?  Did you witness
legislators, lobbyists and others lying about SB 72?  Did you watch the
vote in the Senate?
If so, it is ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT that you contact the five people listed
above.  We also need a signed, notarized affidavit stating clearly what
you saw and heard.  (Contact Sarah at this address or 801-566-1067 for
details.)


CANDIDATES NEEDED!

Our legislators have a dismal record of protecting our rights this year.
No Representative has a voting record better than 60%.  No Senator has a
record better than 44%!  This is simply not acceptable.  (It is important
to remember that voting records do not reflect committee votes or
back-room politics, so they should not be considered an absolute measure
of a legislator's behavior.  But these numbers are so terrible that it's
hard to make a case that we have any pro-rights legislators.)

Volunteers are desperately needed to challenge some of these folks so
they don't come back for another 2-4 years!  We need YOU to file for
office!  Even if you don't have the time and money to mount a major
campaign, just the fact that you file has beneficial effects:
1. The legislator finds out that not everyone approves of what he's
doing.
2. The legislator actually has to do some work instead of just showing up
to claim his seat.  Even if he wins, you will have caused him pain,
expense, and embarrassment - and he'll be motivated not to let that
happen again!
3. By expressing a strong pro-liberty point of view, you will "pull" the
incumbent towards a pro-liberty point of view.  You will also educate
others in your district who will then become your allies in preserving
our rights.

A list of people who have filed to date can be found at:
http://www.governor.state.ut.us/lt_gover/2000candidates.html
If there are no good candidates in your House or Senate district, please
consider running!  The filing fees are low (less than $20 for a House
seat!), and you'll automatically get a delegate spot at the county (or
state if you're in a multi-county district) convention.  Filing deadline
is Friday 5 PM.  You lose nothing by filing; you can always withdraw if
you change your mind.


DELEGATES NEEDED!
Response to the UTGuns request for delegates is still not what it should
be.  MANY more people are needed to volunteer to be delegates!  Isn't it
worth a day or two of your time to make sure that good candidates are
elected?  Do you really WANT Mike Leavitt pushing gun control for another
four years?  Did YOUR legislators do an exemplary job of protecting your
life, liberty and property?
No?  Then volunteer to be a delegate!  This is the best (maybe only!) way
to promote responsible government.

Even if you have signed up on another list of delegates, please sign the
UTGuns list too!  We are not "competing" with anyone else for names.  We
are trying to compile a central list of names of people willing to
support some real pro-gun candidates.

For more information, or to sign up, go to:
http://www.utguns.freeservers.com/volunteer.html


RADIO ALERT!
Sarah Thompson and Arnold Gaunt will be appearing on Radio Liberty on
Thursday, March 16 from 5-7 PM.  Radio Liberty is hosted by Jim Dexter,
and can be found on KTKK, 630 AM.  Topics include SB 72, legislative
liars, gun bills in general, and delegate recruitment.  Please listen and
call in!
Salt Lake County, 801-254-5855.
North of SLCo, 801-670-5855
South of SLCo, 801-470-5855

Thanks!
Sarah



Leg-alerts is written and distributed by Sarah Thompson, M.D.  All
information contained in these alerts is the responsibility of the
author, unless otherwise attributed.


Leg-alerts can also be found at UTGuns,
http://www.UTguns.freeservers.com.  Please check out the new site!


This is a one-way list.  Please do NOT try to post to the list.  It won't
work, and repeat violations will result in your removal from the list.
Comments may be sent to me at [e-mail].  Thanks!


Permission is granted for distribution of these alerts so long as no
changes are made and this message is left intact.


To subscribe/unsubscribe from leg-alerts, send a message to:
[e-mail]
In the body put:
subscribe (or unsubscribe) leg-alerts

 ==================================================================
Charles C. Hardy
Utah Email Coordinator--Women Against Gun Control
<[e-mail]>

________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

-



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

From: "Karl Pearson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Smith & Wesson Compromises
Date: 17 Mar 2000 15:28:14 -0700

In an attempt to placate the wolves in leopard skin tights, Smith and Wesson
has been reported by Infobeat Email Newsletter services. Given the current
political environment of the country and the foolishness of the legal
systems (why don't the sue FORD for traffic accidents?) I can't say I blame
S&W for this approach. Too bad they did it, but they seem to have postponed
legal action (for now).  KLP

*** Smith & Wesson OKs safety locks

WASHINGTON (AP) - The nation's largest gun manufacturer, Smith &
Wesson, has agreed to provide safety locks on its handguns within 60
days and to make them child-resistant within a year, the Clinton
administration announced Friday. Under the unprecedented deal reached
with the company by the departments of Housing and Urban Development
and Treasury and officials representing state and local governments,
Smith & Wesson agreed to a "code of conduct" for sales and
distribution of handguns. In exchange for its commitments toward
advancing gun safety, Smith & Wesson won an agreement by the federal,
state and local governments to dismiss pending suits against it or
refrain from filing new suits. The administration had been
threatening to bring a national lawsuit against the industry if
manufacturers failed to enter negotiations aimed at increasing gun
safety. See
http://www.infobeat.com/stories/cgi/story.cgi?id=2565029832-57e


-



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

From: "Karl Pearson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Humor: Comeback Line
Date: 17 Mar 2000 15:30:05 -0700

A defense attorney was cross-examining a police officer during a felony
trial -- it went like this:

Q. Officer, did you see my client fleeing the scene?
A. No sir, but I subsequently observed a person matching the description of
the offender running several blocks away.

Q. Officer, who provided this description?
A. The officer who responded to the scene.

Q. A fellow officer provided the description of this so-called offender. Do
you trust your fellow officers?
A. Yes sir, with my life.

Q. With your life? Let me ask you this then officer -- do you have a locker
room in the police station -- a room  where you change your clothes in
preparation for your daily duties?
A. Yes sir, we do.

Q. And do you have a locker in that room?
A. Yes sir, I do.

Q. And do you have a lock on your locker?
A. Yes sir.

Q. Now why is it, officer, if you trust your fellow officers with your life,
that you find it necessary to lock your locker in a room you share with
those same officers?

A. You see sir, we share the building with a court complex, and sometimes
lawyers have been known to walk through that room.

With that, the courtroom erupted in laughter, and a prompt recess was
called. The officer on the stand has been nominated for this year's "Best
Comeback" line.


-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Agreement Between S&W and the HUD,Local Governments and States
Date: 18 Mar 2000 08:41:36 -0700

Pardon my naivete, but why can't an injunction or some sort of civil
relief from this "agreement" be obtained against HUD and S&W on the
grounds that it is in violation of the 2nd Amendment?

Scott

-----
CC: "L & J" <[e-mail]>

If you haven't seen it yet, here is
direct from the horses mouth (HUD),
the agreement with S&W.
Mark

http://www.hud.gov/pressrel/gunagree.html

                   AGREEMENT BETWEEN SMITH & WESSON AND
    THE DEPARTMENTS OF THE TREASURY AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT,
                       LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND STATES

                             SUMMARY OF TERMS

Preamble: The city, state, county and federal parties agree to dismiss the
parties from the pending suits and refrain from filing suits against the
manufacturer parties based on an equivalent cause of action.

SAFETY AND DESIGN

All handguns must meet the following safety and design standards:

   * Second "hidden" serial number, to prevent criminals from obliterating
     serial numbers.
   * External locking device sold with all guns within 60 days.
   * Internal locking device on all guns within 24 months.
   * Smart Guns -- Authorized User Technology.
        o Manufacturers commit 2% of annual firearms revenues to the
          development of authorized user technology.
        o Within 36 months, authorized user technology will be included in
          all new firearm models, with the exception of curios and
          collectorsÆ firearms.
        o If top eight manufacturers agree, authorized user technology
          will be included in all new firearms.
   * Child Safety. Within 12 months, handguns will be designed so they
     cannot be readily operated by a child under 6.
   * Performance test. All firearms will be subject to a performance test
     to ensure safety and quality.
   * Drop test. All firearms will be subject to a test to ensure they do
     not fire when dropped.

All pistols must meet the following additional requirements:

   * Safety device. Positive manually operated safety device.
   * Magazine disconnectors must be available on all pistols to customers
     who desire the feature, within 12 months.
   * Chamber load indicators on all pistols, showing whether the pistol is
     loaded, within 12 months.
   * Large capacity magazines. New firearm designs will not be able to
     accept large-capacity magazines that were manufactured prior to
     September 1994. (Manufacture of such magazines has been prohibited
     since that date.)

Law enforcement and military exception. If law enforcement agencies or the
military certify the need, exceptions to these requirements may be made.
Manufacturers will ask that these guns not be resold to the civilian
market.

Warnings about safe storage and handling included with all firearms within
six months.

Illegal firearms. Manufacturers will not sell firearms that can readily be
converted into fully automatic weapons or that are resistant to
fingerprints.


SALES AND DISTRIBUTION

Code of Conduct. The manufacturers will sell only to authorized dealers
and distributors and allow their authorized distributors to sell only to
authorized dealers. Authorized dealers and distributors will agree to a
code of conduct. If manufacturers receive notice of a violation by an
authorized dealer or distributor, they will take action against the dealer
or distributor, including termination of sales to the dealer or
distributor. The Oversight Commission will review such actions and have
authority to require termination or suspension if warranted.

The code of conduct will require authorized dealers and distributors to:

   * Gun shows: make no gun show sales unless all sales at the gun show
     are completed only after a background check.
   * Brady checks: wait as long as necessary for a completed Brady check
     showing that the purchaser is not a felon or otherwise prohibited
     before selling a gun to the purchaser.
   * Safety training for purchasers: transfer firearms only to individuals
     who have passed certified safety course or exam and demonstrate to
     purchasers how to use all safety devices and how to load, unload, and
     safely store the firearm before completing the sale.
   * Multiple handgun sales: all purchasers of multiple handguns to take
     only one handgun from the store on the day of sale, at which point a
     multiple sales report will be filed with ATF. The remainder of the
     guns can only be collected after 14 days.
   * Employee training: require all employees to attend ATF-approved
     training and to pass a exam on firearms laws, straw purchasers,
     illegal trafficking indicators, and gun safety.
   * Insurance: carry liability insurance where available, with a minimum
     coverage of $1 million for each incident.
   * Inventory control: maintain an electronic inventory tracking plan
     within 24 months
   * Security: implement a security plan for securing firearms.
   * Child access: require persons under 18 to be accompanied by adults in
     gun stores or gun sections of stores.
   * Weapons attractive to criminals: not sell large capacity magazines or
     semiautomatic assault weapons.
   * Compliance: provide law enforcement, government regulators, and the
     Oversight Commission established in this Agreement with access to
     documents necessary to determine compliance; cooperate fully in the
     AgreementÆs Oversight mechanism.
   * Crime gun traces: maintain an electronic record of all ATF trace
     requests and report trace requests to manufacturers.
   * Indicted dealers: forgo firearms sales to licensed dealers known to
     be under indictment.
   * Straw purchasers: not to make sales to straw purchasers.

Manufacturer commitments. Manufacturers will:

   * Provide quarterly sales data to ATF.
   * Not market guns in any manner designed to appeal to juveniles or
     criminals.
   * Refrain from selling any modified/sporterized semi-automatic pistol
     of type that cannot be imported into U.S.
   * Reaffirm policy of not placing advertisements in vicinity of schools,
     high crime zones, and public housing.
   * Implement a security plan for securing firearms.
   * Designate an officer to ensure compliance with the Agreement.

Corporate responsibility for crime gun traces. If an authorized dealer or
distributor has a disproportionate number of crime guns traced to it
within three years of sale, the manufacturers will take action, including
possible termination or suspension, against the dealer or distributor. The
Oversight Commission will review such actions and have authority to
require termination or suspension if warranted.

Oversight Commission will be established and empowered to oversee
implementation of the Agreement. The Commission will have five members
selected as follows: one by manufacturers; two by city and county parties;
one by state parties; one by ATF. The CommissionÆs powers will include the
authority to review compliance with the design and safety requirements,
review the safety and training program for dealer and distributor
employees, review manufacturer actions against dealers or distributors
that violate the Agreement or have a disproportionate number of crime gun
traces, and require suspension or termination if warranted.

Role of ATF. To the extent consistent with law, ATF will work with
manufacturers and the Oversight Commission to assist them in meeting
obligations under the Agreement. ATF will notify the Oversight Commission
of certain violations of the Agreement by distributors and dealers if it
uncovers such violations.

Ballistics Imaging. Within six months, if technologically available,
manufacturers will fire all firearms before sale and will enter the
digital image of the casings in a system compatible with the National
Integrated Ballistics Identification Network and accessible to ATF. This
will enable law enforcement to trace crime guns when only the bullets or
casings are recovered.

Access 2000. Manufacturers shall participate in ATFÆs Access 2000 program,
which establishes electronic links with ATF and enables high-speed tracing
of crime guns.

Legislation. The parties will work together to support legislative efforts
to reduce firearm misuse and the development of authorized user
technology.

Education trust fund. Upon resolution of all current city, state, and
county lawsuits, manufacturers will dedicate 1% of overall firearms
revenues to an education trust fund.

Most favored entity. If other manufacturers enter agreements with more
expansive design and distribution reforms, and those manufacturers, along
with the manufacturer parties to this Agreement, account for fifty percent
or more of United States handgun sales, the manufacturer parties to this
Agreement will agree to abide by the same reforms.

Enforcement. The Agreement will be entered into and enforceable as a court
order and as a contract.

-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: SUING CITIES THAT ARE SUING GUN MANUFACTURERS
Date: 18 Mar 2000 11:41:37 -0700

-----

OPEN LETTER FROM TEXAS REP. SUZANNA HUPP, et-al

Friends of the Second Amendment:

During the 76th Session of the Texas Legislature,
Representatives Suzanna Hupp, Rick Green, Ron Clark, Bob
Turner, Ron Wilson, and Senator Lindsay passed S.B. 717 to
prohibit Texas cities from suing the gun manufacturers.
Despite our efforts here in Texas, 28 cities across the U.S.
have filed frivolous lawsuits against the gun manufacturers
in an effort to achieve gun control through the courts and
bankrupt the industry.

Such lawsuits threaten the viability of gun stores in Texas and
across the nation. Colt Manufacturing has already announced that
because of the lawsuits they will no longer sell handguns to the
civilian public. In addition, Colt is in the process of buying
H&K manufacturing and has said that once the purchase is complete,
H&K will no longer sell handguns to the public. Most recently,
Smith & Wesson has announced it is up for sale. The events that
have transpired as a direct result of the lawsuits against the
gun industry do not bode well for gun dealers or gun owners.

As such, we and a few other Texas legislators have concluded that
more must be done to stop the assault on our constitutional rights.
After consulting legal experts, we have concluded that legal action
can and should be taken against the cities that have conspired to
deprive us of our rights. We are in the process of drafting a
complaint that will be filed in a federal district court in Texas.

We will have at least four state representatives who will sue on
behalf of themselves and their constituents alleging that the
cities have conspired to violate their right to keep and bear
arms by using the courts to impose gun control and threaten
the gun industry with bankruptcy.

In addition, several Texas gun stores will be plaintiffs in the
lawsuit because of the cities' attempt to interfere with the gun
stores' ability to participate in interstate commerce - a right
that is protected by the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

The right to keep and bear arms and the right to participate in
interstate commerce are fundamental rights that must be protected.
The mayors of the cities, empowered by the statutes creating their
offices and by ordinances and resolutions passed by the city councils,
have acted to deprive Texas citizens and gun stores of their
protected rights and should be held accountable in a court of law.

As you can well imagine, such a lawsuit will be an enormous
undertaking that will tax the resources of the plaintiffs and
attorneys who choose to participate in the lawsuit. As such,
we are asking that every freedom loving American make a
donation to our legal fund, so that we can move forward with
the lawsuit and defend our Constitution from further abuse.

If you are willing to contribute or would like more information,
please contact our public relations director, Trey Blocker, at:

[e-mail]

Contributions can be mailed to:

Civil Liberties Defense Foundation
ATTN: Trey Blocker - Executive Director
P.O. Box 163653
Austin, Texas 78716-3653
[phone]

Or visit their website at http://www.libertydefense.com

Tell him how much you are able to contribute and how he can
best contact you. Thank you for your assistance in this great
effort to avert a constitutional crisis.


Sincerely,

Suzanna Hupp
Texas State Representative
District 54

Rick Green
Texas State Representative
District 46


Moving Forward! Civil Liberties Defense Foundation Lawsuit!
By Chris W. Stark - Director GUN OWNERS ALLIANCE

The Texas "Civil Liberties Defense Foundation" lawsuit, is
moving forward and picking up more plaintiffs along the way.
Following is a complete list (as of 10 March 2000) of Texas
legislators who will be plaintiffs in the lawsuit against the
cities trying to take away our 2nd Amendment rights. If your
Representative or Senator is not on this list, pick up the
phone and encourage them to join the lawsuit and help protect
the right of Texans and all Americans to keep and bear arms.
Phone numbers for your legislators can be found at
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/

To read our previous alerts regarding the Civil Liberties Defense
Foundation Lawsuit, go to http://www.goa-texas.org/TX_lawsuit.htm

If your legislator IS on the list below, pick up the phone and
thank him or her for standing up for your 2nd Amendment rights:

Rep. Leo Berman
http://www.house.state.tx.us/house/dist6/dist6.htm
Rep. Fred Brown
http://www.house.state.tx.us/house/dist14/dist14.htm
Rep. Wayne Christian
http://www.house.state.tx.us/house/dist9/dist9.htm
Rep. Mary Denny
http://www.house.state.tx.us/house/dist63/dist63.htm
Rep. Rick Green
http://www.house.state.tx.us/house/dist46/dist46.htm
Rep. Charlie Howard
http://www.house.state.tx.us/house/dist26/dist26.htm
Rep. Suzanna Hupp
http://www.house.state.tx.us/house/dist54/dist54.htm
Rep. Carl Isett
http://www.house.state.tx.us/house/dist84/dist84.htm
Rep. Todd Smith
http://www.house.state.tx.us/house/dist92/dist92.htm
Rep. Robert Talton
http://www.house.state.tx.us/house/dist144/dist144.htm
Rep. Ron Wilson
http://www.house.state.tx.us/house/dist131/dist131.htm
Rep. Arlene Wohlgemuth
http://www.house.state.tx.us/house/dist58/dist58.htm
Former Texas Senator Jerry Patterson
[e-mail]

Rep. Suzanna Hupp - Rare Defender of the 2nd Amendment
By Chris W. Stark - Director GUN OWNERS ALLIANCE

Dear Second Amendment Supporters,

This week, Texas State Representative Suzanna Gratia Hupp
appeared on Nightline to debate anti-Second Amendment advocate
Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy. During this debate Suzanna
Hupp continued to demonstrate her courage to stand up to the
anti-Second Amendment radicals and refused to follow the
politically correct positions of the media.

Her appearance has drawn quite a response from the left-wing
radicals. Common decency and local ordinances against vulgarity
do not permit me to share with you some of the dissenting
opinions that have been expressed to Suzanna Hupp and her staff.

For those of you not familiar with Ms. McCarthy, her husband was
killed in the Long Island Rail shooting, which transformed her
into a vehement anti-gun proponent. The anti-Second Amendment
radicals do not hesitate to use her to promote their
unconstitutional agenda.

Fortunately, we have an even more effective spokesperson for our
cause. Representative Hupp watched helplessly as a madman murdered
both of her parents and 21 others in the Luby's Massacre in Killeen,
Texas in 1991. After that point, she became a staunch Second
Amendment advocate, and was instrumental, in the passage of the
Texas concealed-carry law in 1995. In fact, Suzanna Hupp has worked
nationwide appearing in many state capitols fighting for our Second
Amendment right. You can listen to her testimony on real audio,
by following the link at http://www.goa-texas.org/hupp-7.htm

In 1996, she ran for state representative on the platform that
she would continue to protect and expand the rights of gun
owners in Texas and across the nation. She has worked hard
to make the concealed-carry law more effective, and in 1999,
she helped pass S.B. 717 prohibiting Texas cities from
joining anti-Second Amendment advocates in suing the gun
manufacturers. To see her tireless work in 1999, go to
http://www.goa-texas.org/Texas76th.htm for most of the pro-
gun legislation for the 76th Legislature, was offered by her.

In late 1999, she and several other state legislators formed
the Civil Liberties Defense Foundation for the purpose of
filing a lawsuit against the cities that have sued the gun
manufacturers for conspiring to violate our Second Amendment
rights and force the gun industry out of business.

Legislators such as Suzanna Hupp don't come around very often.
As such, we must do everything that we can to insure that she
is reelected to her office.

Her courageous appearance on Nightline and numerous other media
outlets defending the Second Amendment with truth and conviction
has raised the concern of our anti-Second Amendment opponents.
Her stand on this issue is known in the anti-gun community from
coast to coast and there is no doubt that they will attempt to
silence her by trying to defeat her in the fall general election.

We cannot afford to allow the anti-Second Amendment radicals
to silence one of our most courageous, outspoken Constitutional
advocates. Suzanna Hupp has always had the guts to speak the
truth in the face of the politically correct media. Now we must
have the guts to do what we can to keep her fighting for us. We
need Suzanna Hupp defending our rights not only in the halls of
government, but more importantly, we need Suzanna Hupp defending
our rights in the halls of public opinion.

I urge you, regardless of where you live and where you vote to
support our national heritage, the Second Amendment, and freedom
by helping Representative Hupp get reelected in November.

Please send your contribution to the Suzanna Hupp Campaign
at P.O. Box 273, Kempner, Texas 76539. You can also request
information on Suzanna Hupp and her campaign from her
political advisor at [e-mail].

With Respect,
Gun Owners Alliance
Chris W. Stark - Director
*************************************************************
from The 2ndAmendmentNews Team

If you received this as a forward and wish to join please send:
E-Mail to [e-mail] with the following text in
the message body: SUBSCRIBE 2nd-Amendment-News

Feel free to forward our alerts.

-



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

From: "Karl Pearson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: Compromise
Date: 22 Mar 2000 10:59:43 -0700

I sent the following email to Smith and Wesson. No response yet. Any
comments?

Karl L. Pearson
Senior uniVerse Database Analyst
Senior Unix/NT/Win Analyst
[e-mail]

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2000 5:49 PM
Cc: [e-mail]


As a life-time shooter, and a FORMER owner of 2 fine Smith and Wesson 38
revolvers, I regret to inform you that I will no longer purchase anything
from Smith and Wesson or its affiliates.

Your apparent total capitulation to the socialist government democrats is
indicative of your lack of trust for the common man. You are also starting a
path that will lead to your demise as a viable self-protection provider.

Good bye and good luck,

Karl L. Pearson
Senior uniVerse Database Analyst
Senior Unix/NT/Win Analyst
[e-mail]


-



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

From: "Karl Pearson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: InfoBeat News - Afternoon Edition @  03/22/2000
Date: 22 Mar 2000 15:46:26 -0700

I've cut all but one story from this edition. Amazing how public officials
will ignore even empirical data when they are shown to have made a mistake,
especially one where lives are being forfeited.  KLP

*** Australia rejects NRA claims

SYDNEY, Australia (AP) - Australian officials demanded Wednesday that
the National Rifle Association pull a video airing on its Web site
claiming that the nation's gun reform laws had backfired. The video,
presented as a television news story, claims that crimes involving
guns have increased in Australia since the laws, which ban all
semi-automatic rifles, semi-automatic shotguns and pump action
shotguns, were introduced. Federal Attorney General Daryl Williams
said the NRA was using inaccurate statistics and urged the group to
remove "any reference to Australia" from its Web site. "I find it
quite offensive that the NRA is using the very successful gun reform
laws introduced in 1996 as the basis for promoting ownership of
firearms in the United States," he said. See
http://www.infobeat.com/stories/cgi/story.cgi?id=2565133441-b39



-



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

From: "larry larsen" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Smith and Wesson
Date: 24 Mar 2000 08:12:01 -0700

Greetings To All,

I called S&W and talked with a rep,  (he is an actual employee for 23 years
manning the hot line).  He is very worried that the wrong impression of what
S&W did will be taken by gun buyers.  He feels, or has been told by someone,
that this is the only way to avoid bankruptcy by the government in the
future.  He advised that I read the agreement,
http://www.hud.gov/pressrel/gunagree.html  before making up my mind.  After
reading the agreement I say they caved in, and are not worthy of my money
for a purchase of any product they sell, or service they claim to render.

Larry

"Courage, not compromise, brings the smile of God's approval."

Thomas S. Monson (Ensign, November 1986, page 41)








-



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

From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Neighborhood caucas meetings held this evening;  Please attend.
Date: 27 Mar 2000 08:47:05 -0700

The following information is provided by Sarah Thompson of UTGuns.
Please take the time to attend you caucas (formerly "Mass") meeting
tonight and run for, or at least support pro-liberty candidates for,
State deleagate, county delegate, and precinct chair.  Information on
where your caucas meeting will be held can be found in Sunay's (March
26th) Deseret News, by calling the county HQ of your political party, or
by using the web links in the following message.


==================================================================
Charles C. Hardy
Utah Email Coordinator--Women Against Gun Control
<[e-mail]>

Today's the day!  Caucus meetings are THIS EVENING - MONDAY at 7 PM!

This is the most important election you will participate in for the next
several years!  We now have the chance to choose GOOD, PRINCIPLED,
PRO-LIBERTY candidates for Governor, US Senator, US House, Attorney
General, Utah House, half the Utah Senators, County officials and others.
 Once "establishment" politicians, beholden to special interests get
nominated it will be too late to change things, and we will once again
have to choose between "the lesser of two evils".

NOW is the time to act!

PLEASE ATTEND YOUR CAUCUS MEETING THIS EVENING!  The rewards for spending
a small amount of time at your precinct meeting are great.


THINGS TO DO TODAY!

1. If you don't already know where your caucus meeting will be held, find
out as soon as possible.  See
http://www.utguns.freeservers.com/caucus.html.  If your precinct still
doesn't have a host, volunteer to host it.  (We will help you learn what
you need to know!)

2. Call your like-minded neighbors and friends and invite them to attend.
 Even if you have already invited them, call and remind them to attend
and ask if there's anything you can do to help them.  Offer to assist
with car-pooling, child care, etc.

3. If there is a candidate (or candidates) you support, call them and ask
what you can do to help, and if they know others in your precinct with
whom you can work.

4. Wherever possible, decide BEFORE the meeting who will run for each
position.  (This is not always possible, of course!)  Your goal is to
make sure that ONE pro-liberty person runs for EACH available position -
no more, no less!  So if there are two state delegates in your precinct,
only TWO pro-rights people should run.  (There will likely be other
liberal candidates, of course!)

5. ATTEND THE CAUCUS MEETING!  Arrive at your caucus about 6:45 PM.

6. Make sure your precinct chair follows the rules and the proper order
for the meeting.  This order is: 1) Welcome, 2) Sign-in, 3) Call to
order, 4) Prayer and Pledge, 5) Read the Platform, 6) Collect
Donations/Pledges, 7) Elect Precinct Officers, 8) Elect County and State
Delegates, 9) Explain Check-a-Buck, 10) Collect e-mail addresses, 11) Ask
for Election Judges, and 12) Wrap-up and adjournment.  If your precinct
chair deviates from this order, you should insist that he follow the
printed agenda.  The proper way to do this is to "call for the order of
the day", but don't worry about being technical.  It requires a 2/3 vote
of ALL present to "suspend" the rules, and change the agenda.
Your precinct chair should also verify that each attendee is a registered
voter who lives in your precinct.  (Those who are not yet registered must
do so at the caucus.)

7. All voting for delegates and precinct officers must be done by secret
ballot.  The only exception is an uncontested race. (Where only two
people are running for two positions for example.)  Voting must be done
for ONE position at a time.  (For example, you can vote for both state
delegates at the same time, but you cannot vote for precinct chair and
county delegate at the same time.)  This means you cannot legally vote to
"let everyone keep his current position".  A 2/3 vote of all present is
needed to change the voting rules.  Each candidate needs a MAJORITY of
all persons voting to win.  (For details see:
http://www.utguns.freeservers.com/legalerts032400delinfo.html

8. Never vote for anyone who isn't a pro-liberty candidate.  For example,
if there are two delegate positions, and there is only one good
candidate, vote ONLY for that one person - even if you have two votes.

7. Run for, and get elected to, as many offices as you can.  You can be
elected a precinct officer, a state delegate, and a county delegate.
Your goal is to get pro-rights people elected to ALL offices.

8. Always be polite but assertive.  Your job is to stand up for your
rights and insist on fair elections - not to "be charitable".  This does
not mean you should be rude or offensive to your friends and neighbors!

9. Dress appropriately!  You do not need to be formal, but you should be
neat, clean, and well-groomed.  If you want your neighbors to trust you
with an elected position, you need to "look the part".

10. If you are hosting a caucus, provide light refreshments for your
neighbors.

For more information, details, etc. see the following:
http://www.utguns.freeservers.com/delegate.html
http://www.utguns.freeservers.com/legalerts032400delinfo.html


If you have questions, need information, or need help finding caucus
locations, call Sarah Thompson 801-566-1067.

Other people you can call...
Weber County: Arnold Gaunt, 801-621-3122
Davis County: Dave Hansen, 801-544-2744
Utah County: Tom Draschil, 800-725-6195


If you've ever wished you could "really make a difference", NOW is you
chance!  Please don't let this golden opportunity pass you by.  In less
than 24 hours, it will be too late!  Act now to protect YOUR rights!

Thank you to all of you who have called, written, attended delegate
training, and helped to spread the word.

To all of our candidates for elective office, and all of you running for
delegate positions and precinct offices - GOOD LUCK!  Please call or
write and let us know how you do!

Sarah



Leg-alerts is written and distributed by Sarah Thompson, M.D.  All
information contained in these alerts is the responsibility of the
author, unless otherwise attributed.


Leg-alerts can also be found at UTGuns,
http://www.UTguns.freeservers.com.  Please check out the new site!


This is a one-way list.  Please do NOT try to post to the list.  It won't
work, and repeat violations will result in your removal from the list.
Comments may be sent to me at [e-mail].  Thanks!


Permission is granted for distribution of these alerts so long as no
changes are made and this message is left intact.


To subscribe/unsubscribe from leg-alerts, send a message to:
[e-mail]
In the body put:
subscribe (or unsubscribe) leg-alerts


________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

-



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

From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Anti-self-defense petition has a toll free number for more info.
Date: 27 Mar 2000 15:38:53 -0700

This is from today's SL Tribune
<http://www.sltrib.com/03272000/utah/36545.htm>.  I plan to call the
number and request some information from them.  On the one hand, I want
to make absolutely sure that I haven't missed any facts in making my
decision on this issue.  ;)  On the other hand, every phone call and
piece of
material they spend time and money on responding to those of us who will
judge the
material based solely on facts rather than emotion, paranoia, hyperbole,
etc, is that much less time and money they have to reach those who might
be
swayed by anything other than facts.

Fight Over Guns Returns to State Capitol
                                             Monday, March 27,
                                             2000


    BY MICHAEL VIGH and
    JUDY FAHYS
    THE SALT LAKE TRIBUNE

        About 100 people gathered at the state Capitol on
    Saturday to promote a cause lawmakers refused to support:
    outlawing virtually all guns in schools, universities and places
    of worship.

[...]

The coalition also established a toll-free number for
    petition inquiries. Registered voters who are interested should
    dial [phone] for information.


==================================================================
Charles C. Hardy
Utah Email Coordinator--Women Against Gun Control
<[e-mail]>

________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

-



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

From: "Karl Pearson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: The Use Of Deadly Force
Date: 27 Mar 2000 15:50:01 -0700

I received this from a friend of mine who is trained in the use of knives
for self defense but has yet to receive a CCW permit.  This information was
covered in the CCW class I took but am wondering if anyone with a legal
background has further information that could be helpful in determining if
this is totally correct information. If so, here's an FYI.

Thanks,

Karl L. Pearson
Senior uniVerse Database Analyst
Senior Unix/NT/Win Analyst
[e-mail]


There are four elements to legitimate self defense, and they must all be
present simultaneously in order for there to be a situation where deadly
self-defensive actions are warranted. They are:

I.    Ability
II.   Opportunity
III.  Manifest Intent (Imminent Jeopardy)
IV.   Preclusion


I. Ability

An "ability" is simply an injurious capacity. It usually manifests itself in
the form of a weapon of some sort, but not always. Serious injury can be
inflicted by many individuals using no weapon at all. The person you applied
deadly force against must have been "able" to kill you or inflict serious
bodily harm. Threats alone do not suffice, unless he had the ability in hand
to carry them out. If you were attacked by a person much larger than
yourself, or by someone using martial arts techniques, or several
individuals at the same time, you may reasonably conclude that he/they had
the ability to seriously injure or kill you, even though they may have been
technically "unarmed." Disparity in size, age, strength, sex, and the level
of aggressiveness of the involved parties are all important matters when
considering the element of "ability."

II. Opportunity

When considering the element of "opportunity," we must have a situation
where this attacker, in addition to having an "ability," was also in a
position to bring the destructive powers of his ability to bear effectively
upon you. The question is, were you within the effective range of his
weapon(s)? For example, a knife or bludgeon is harmless in the hands of
someone standing twenty meters away from you, yet either can be deadly if
the person is standing within arm's reach, or is several meters away but
closing fast. A firearm, on the other hand, is considered deadly at any
range.

III. Manifest Intent (Imminent Jeopardy)

You are in "imminent jeopardy" when the attacker unmistakably indicates, by
words and/or actions, that it is his intention to kill or seriously injure
you, and further, that he intends to do so at once. Your are not permitted
to use deadly force to defend yourself against nebulous threats. The danger
must be mortal and imminent. It must appear that the circumstances were
sufficient to occasion the legitimate fears of a reasonable person, and that
you acted under the influence of those fears, not in a spirit of vengeance
or criminal assault. When a person has reasonable grounds for believing, and
does in fact actually believe, that the danger of his being killed or
seriously injured is imminent, he is permitted by law to act in self-defense
based on those appearances even, if necessary, to the extent of using lethal
force. This is true even if it turns out that the appearances were
misleading and the person was thus honestly mistaken as to the real extent
of the danger. It is for the jury to decide whether appearances of danger
were sufficient so as to justify the defensive actions that were taken.

No one is expected to wait until they have absolute and incontrovertible
knowledge that a threat is real. However, there must be an overt act coupled
with that threat. The point is, it does no matter if your attacker's
"weapon" later proves to be a toy, or non-functional, or unloaded. So long
as, under the circumstances, you had good reason to believe (reasonable
belief) that the weapon was real and functional and that he intended to use
it to harm you forthwith, your defensive actions will likely be considered
reasonable and appropriate. Remember, you will be judged only with regard to
what you knew and reasonably believed to be true at the time. You will not
be judged based upon facts and circumstances of which you had no cognizance.

"Intent" is, after all, a mental process. We therefor cannot perceive intent
directly. We can only infer it from the person's actions and/or words.
Accordingly, it is an error to say, "He was going to kill me." How do you
know? Are you a prophet, or mind-reader?

The fact is that you don't know what was going through his mind. The correct
way to phrase it is: "It looked as if he was going to kill me." That way,
you correctly identify your motivating factor as his actions, which you can
see, not his thoughts, which you cannot see.

Intent is not strictly necessary for imminent jeopardy to be present. You
can, for example, be placed in lethal danger by an  individual acting with
extreme carelessness but who may have no specific intention of harming you.

IV. Preclusion

"Preclusion" simply means that all other options were precluded. In other
words, you used deadly force only as a last, desperate resort. The jury must
be persuaded that, under the circumstances, you had no logical or reasonable
alternative but to use deadly force to defend yourself. Generally, the more
self-restraint you use, the more "reasonable" your actions will look. In
fact, "self-restraint" is a key word, particularly if you used a firearm. It
is desirable for the jury to see your actions as judicious, restrained,
reasonable, and retrogressive. They should believe you made every reasonable
effort to abate the situation, even including the use of non-lethal force,
before finally resorting to the use of deadly force. Conversely, they should
see your attacker's actions as precipitous, unwarranted, barbaric, and
unconscionable.

Some states require preclusion as a component of legitimate self-defense.
Some more liberally-inclined state legislatures have even based "mandatory
retreat laws." In general, the require a person to retreat from an attack,
rather than use deadly force to repel it, even when the person attacked
otherwise has a right to be where he is. Generally, mandatory retreat laws
apply to every situation, except when the victim is in his own home.

The outcome of criminal and civil court proceeding alike is often determined
not so much by how a particular law is written, as it is by "courtroom
poker." The winner is usually the one who can cause a jury to be sympathetic
to his side, and preclusion is often the magic ingredient.

The decision to use deadly force always hinges upon a balance of two
opposing imperatives: risk exposure and restraint.

Exposure to risk is, of course, inherent to all human activity. Risk cannot
be entirely purged from any endeavor, but is must be identified, controlled,
and minimized. Everyone is expected to expose themselves to some risk during
the course of their daily activities. It is an understood condition of life.
However, no one is expected or required to expose themselves to unreasonable
or suicidal risk.

In any situation, as a person's risk exposure increases, he is permitted by
law to take reasonable measure to reduce it, restraining himself from using
deadly force until such a time as risk exposure has escalated, or is about
to escalate, to unacceptable levels. At that point, deadly force may be
employed if it is the only reasonable avenue through which the risk can be
reduced.


-



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

From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Use Of Deadly Force
Date: 27 Mar 2000 16:04:18 -0700

On Mon, 27 Mar 2000 15:50:01 -0700 "Karl Pearson" <[e-mail]>
writes:
> I received this from a friend of mine who is trained in the use of
> knives
> for self defense but has yet to receive a CCW permit.  This
> information was
> covered in the CCW class I took but am wondering if anyone with a
> legal
> background has further information that could be helpful in
> determining if
> this is totally correct information. If so, here's an FYI.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Karl L. Pearson
> Senior uniVerse Database Analyst
> Senior Unix/NT/Win Analyst
> [e-mail]

Karl,

I'm not a lawyer, but I can offer one bit of potential correction based
on the experience of having lived in Massachussetts for nearly 4 years
while attending college.

>
> From: "Fundamentals of Defensive Shooting" by John Farnam:
> IV. Preclusion
>
>Generally, mandatory
> retreat laws
> apply to every situation, except when the victim is in his own home.
>

It is my understanding that in some jurisdictions, like Massachusetts,
mandatory retreat laws apply to EVERY situation INCLUDING when the victim
in his/her own home.  Thus, even in your own home, you must retreat if
you are able to do so.  I believe that some, but not all, States that
once had this provision have now repealed it.  Others, including Utah,
insofar as I know, have never required a person to retreat from his/her
home before using deadly force.

Of course places like taxachusetts and NY will also lock a victim up for
having used an unregistered gun in self-defense even after the actual use
of that gun has been deemed justified.

==================================================================
Charles C. Hardy
Utah Email Coordinator--Women Against Gun Control
<[e-mail]>

________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: JPFO Wants to Give You Money -- Will You Take It??
Date: 29 Mar 2000 12:24:01 -0700

-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

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

March 27, 2000

JPFO Wants to Give You Money -- Will You Take It??


Do you want to put the gun prohibitionists on the defensive?

Do you want to make the media froth at the mouth?

Do you want the public to reject victim disarmament?

Do you want to do these three things, and have the government
to actually help "pay" for them?

You can do it in YOUR CITY with our new matching funds program.
A highly patriotic JPFO member has made money available to help
pay for billboards featuring eye-catching JPFO artwork. You or
your local group can really make a difference ... at half the
cost!

Why Billboards?

Billboards can be the most cost-effective way to win hearts and
minds. Why? Because one picture can say a thousand words in just
a few seconds -- and the image goes directly into the brain --
hundreds and thousands of times per day. Pictures generate
emotional understanding like no other communication tool. He
who wins hearts and minds, wins the battle of ideas!

If the public develops a negative reaction to "gun control"
schemes, then the politicians will notice. Billboards can
quickly and effectively cause people to distrust and eventually
ridicule "gun control" rhetoric -- and that is exactly what we
need.

How Matching Funds Double Your Money

Here is the deal:

Committed supporters of freedom raise 50% of the cost of a
billboard, and send that to the JPFO matching funds program.
That money counts as a donation to JPFO, and is tax-deductible
for the donors. (JPFO is a 501c(3) tax-exempt educational
organization.)

JPFO will add in the other 50% of the cost, and then commission
the billboard.

Typical billboards are "30-sheet" style about 11 feet by 22 feet.
Depending upon location, they usually cost between $1,100 and
$1,500 for one month display rental. Compare that cost with a
full-page advertisement in a newspaper that can cost thousands
of dollars for just one day ... and forgotten the next day.

Have JPFO Billboards Succeeded Before?

Billboards really work. JPFO has successfully used billboards
before to raise public awareness of the issues. For example,
JPFO ran the blockbusting billboard that shows the monster
Adolf Hitler giving the Nazi salute and saying "All in favor
of 'gun control' raise your right hand." The billboard grabbed
attention worldwide because the Associated Press carried a story
about it. Even German and Israeli magazines noticed it.

The "Gun Control is Racist" billboards posted in Milwaukee's
inner city drew a strong media and public reaction -- and might
have helped convince citizens to support a Second Amendment-type
provision to be added to the state constitution. That provision
was approved by 73% of voters statewide.

JPFO urged pro-freedom activists in Missouri to use our approach
in the predominantly African-American section of St. Louis during
a referendum on concealed carry. Unfortunately, those activists
rejected our suggestion, and then spent hundreds of thousands
of dollars ... and lost.

By-pass the Media and Save Our Rights

We face the most serious national challenge to the right to keep
and bear arms that has ever appeared. The anti-self defense and
victim disarmament lobby is doing everything possible to destroy
our rights, and they have powerful mainstream media support.
You can make a huge impact to fight their effort if you take
advantage of this marvelous opportunity to DOUBLE the effect of
your pro-gun dollars.

The billboard matching fund program is easy, and it's the most
powerful way for you to fight back. Billboards by-pass the
mainstream media. Billboards speak the message all day long,
without being interrupted or cut off or censored by news
manipulators. You just can't get a better deal to influence
public opinion.

Matching Fund Program: It's Easy!

Here's all you do. By e-mail or fax, provide JPFO with:

    Your name and telephone number.

    The name and size of the city where you want to post the
    billboard.

    The location where you want to the billboard to appear.
    Please provide either a street address or cross-streets
    so we can find it on a map.

    The company name and phone number for the billboard you
    want to use. Usually the company name is featured at the
    bottom of the billboard; the phone number will probably be
    listed locally or as an 800 number.

    How much money you think you can raise -- must be at least
    50% of the billboard rental cost.

    The name of a local group who might assist in fund raising.

    The name of a local group or person who can be the contact
    for local media.

JPFO will help you choose the best billboard graphic, and then
make it happen!

Limited Time Opportunity -- Call Now!

Please contact me at JPFO today. Even if you have only some of
the needed information, but want to pursue the program, call me
with what you have.

The matching funds won't last forever, so it is first come,
first served. To maximize the effect of the billboard campaign
and to get the best advertising value, JPFO reserves the right
to make the final decision about whether to provide the matching
funds in any given situation. JPFO will let you know its
decision before you send in the money, of course!

This matching funds opportunity may be here but a short time.
Let me hear from you as soon as possible. There is too much at
stake to delay even a day.

Yours in liberty,
Aaron Zelman

Phone: [phone]
  Fax: [phone]

P.S.: If you're excited about the program but cannot get all
the resources and information together, you can still help.
You can send your private contribution to the matching funds
program -- just note "matching funds" on the check or when you
call with a credit card -- and JPFO will use that money to post
billboards in key cities. You still get the tax deduction --
and the money is DOUBLED! Now is the time to act, and your help
will really make a difference ... guaranteed!

See the billboard:

We also have a t-shirt: http://www.jpfo.org/triggerlocks.htm

================================================================
This Alert archived at http://www.jpfo.org/alert20000327.htm
================================================================
Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership
PO Box 270143
Hartford, Wisconsin 53027

Phone: [phone]
Orders only: 1-800-869-1884 (toll-free!)
Fax: [phone]
Web: http://www.jpfo.org/

================================================================
To SUBSCRIBE to JPFO Alerts: send a blank e-mail to:

   mailto:[e-mail]

To UN-SUBSCRIBE to JPFO Alerts: send a blank e-mail to:

   mailto:[e-mail]

In either case, respond to the confirmation message you will
get back.
================================================================

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.5.3

iQA/AwUBOOAOHSYkT7EuY/ZzEQKsvwCgsWMobqwHH2WVLsTyPtHhge5F5hkAoMzd
OskTET8qvshRJTAsCplx6EBo
=QBwN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: What the firearm manufacturers should do
Date: 29 Mar 2000 13:06:40 -0700

-----

In response to the several local governments that have filed lawsuits
against the firearm manufacturers, they should not just defend against
them, but counterattack, using the following measures:

- Urge all citizens to boycott the localities that have filed the actions,
and  for citizens of those localities to sue their governments in support
of the firearm manufacturers, providing boilerplate petitions and pleadings
for that purpose.

- File countersuits for abuse of process, seeking all costs and punitive damages.

- Suspend sales or deliveries of firearms to all government organizations
in the United States, unless or until they file actions in intervention, or
at least an amicus curiae brief, in support of the firearm manufacturers.
Let the government agencies, including those suing, imagine a world in
which they have to import all of their own firearms.

- Publicly announce plans to dissolve their companies, release all
plans, tools, and methods to the public domain, and assist individuals
and organizations to become manufacturers themselves. Let the government
agencies imagine a world in which there are hundreds of thousands of
small firearms manufacturers.

The counteractions should stress the following arguments:

- Suits against manufacturers are a constructive conspiracy to deprive
citizens of their right of self-defense (42 USC 1983).

- Putting the manufacturers out of business would deprive government at
all levels of the ability to acquire firearms from domestic manufacturers.

- Manufacturers are not responsible for the actions of their customers.

- Firearms do more to deter violence than to facilitate injury, and the
benefits of such deterrence must be weighed against any costs of firearms
under the "attractive nuisance" theory of the plaintiffs.

- The measures sought by the cities would constitute restraint of trade in
a way that would violate anti-trust laws, and interference in interstate
commerce.

- The measures sought by the cities are impossible for the manufacturers
to effectively perform, since they do not control what happens to their
products once the products are sold, "smart gun" technology does not exist
and may never be reliable, and no one can be compelled to do the impossible.

--Jon

===================================================================
Constitution Society, 1731 Howe Av #370, Sacramento, CA 95825
916/568-1022, 916/450-7941VM         Date: 03/22/00  Time: 09:52:55
http://www.constitution.org/     mailto:[e-mail]
===================================================================

-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: Words of Encouragement from another CEO to S&W
Date: 29 Mar 2000 13:19:03 -0700

-----

Words of Encouragement from another CEO to S&W

Smith & Wesson
2100 Roosevelt Ave.
Springfield, MA 01102
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
http:/www.smith-wesson.com [Note: doesn't appear valid. - Scott]
[e-mail]

Editors Note: Rick Carone is a past member of the NRA
Board of Directors and VP of Chase Manhattan Bank.
Presently he is CEO of the OGM group of companies. NRA
and GOA have condemned the S&W actions and many are
calling for a boycott.


Ed:

I'm the CEO of an oil company that operates offshore in an
environmentally sensitive area. As you might appreciate,
ours is a highly regulated industry. In fact, we work with
over 30 state, local and federal government agencies. Having
dealt with extremist environmental groups over the last
twenty years, who also use "safety" to try and shut down
offshore projects and destroy the associated companies...
we're still here... So may I give you some advice? Keep in
mind that you are dealing with extremists who simply want
all guns and anything or anyone associated with them to
"disappear". Nothing you say or do trying to appease them is
going to change that...you just proved to them that their
bullying tactics work and have emboldened them for their next
attack.

I've watched companies in our business try the very same thing
(appeasement)....These few companies are perceived as weak. Far
from letting up on them, the extremist groups -- like wolves--
continually attack the weakest companies in the industry. This
works out pretty well for the rest of us for a number of reasons:

1) It's a lesson for everyone in the industry -- including the
company whose "reasonable concessions" are taken advantage of
-- that appeasement does not work. Thus the survivors are
strengthened whether or not the weak company survives (in many
cases they can't).

2) While the appeasing company becomes the one to be continually
chewed on, pressure is taken off the rest of the industry, giving
them the opportunity to more effectively deal with threats.

So what you've done here may not be all that bad for the industry
as a whole; it's just going to take a lot of energy, time and
money out of S&W as you become their red meat. In this regard,
I think you deserve another prestigious NRA award and banquet,
like the one they gave you a couple of years ago.

Great Job.....Keep up the good work. Not everyone
appreciates how smart you have to be to develop a smart
gun. When the going gets tough...just remember the words
of another great businessman....Rodney King...
"Can't we all just get along?"

Good Luck & Best Regards, Rick Carone

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

Dear Ed:

I'm an engineer who design and builds products for an
industry with more accidents and law suits that the firearms
industry. You have made a bad mistake.

Did you ever seek the advice of anyone else before giving in
to blackmail?

When your new technology fails to work, you and S&W will
be sued. This so called smart technology can and will fail.
Firearms have been designed over many decades to withstand
extremes of temperature and water and dirt.

Can you imagine your own home with a burglar breaking in
and not being able to use your own firearm?

Can you foresee a criminal using one of your guns and the
guns fires in spite of your device?

If you produce this device simply because you were
blackmailed into it and force this on your customers you
deserve all the lawsuits you are going to get.

Weldon H. Clark Jr.
**************************************************
from The 2ndAmendmentNews Team

To join please send to [e-mail] the text:
SUBSCRIBE 2nd-Amendment-News

-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Whispers of Change?
Date: 29 Mar 2000 14:57:40 -0700

Whispers of Change?
3-21-2000
by Lowell Potter


Is it possible that there are whispers of something other than the
politically correct spin of Media, Inc. gently starting to rustle through
the leaves of the status quo?

Although no fanfare or even reaction resulted from it, Jesse Ventura uttered
the unthinkable the other night on national television. In an interview
conducted by Chris Matthews at Winona State University in Minnesota, the
popular loose-cannon Minnesota governor spoke the unspeakable.

In response to a question by a young college student concerning gun control
laws, the 2nd Amendment, and the possible curtailing of hunting activites,
the irascible and unpredictable Ventura shook his massive finger at the
query and said something very similar to this:

"The 2nd Amendment of the Constitution has nothing at all to do with
hunting rights. No, (shaking finger) the purpose of the 2nd Amendment was
to guarantee that people could keep and bear arms in order that they might
prevent unscrupulous governments from becoming too oppressive!"

Sadly, but predictably, the youthful questioner stood with a vacant and
uncomprehending look on his face, as did perhaps most of the viewing
audience that evening. Matthews was deathly silent and obviously mildly
shocked by Ventura's forthright exclaimation, and I rooted with my every
fiber that Jesse would repeat his blockbuster statement and hammer home
the point in no uncertain terms even more unequivocally.

Alas, the moment passed and the interview continued as though Jesse had
never breached this forbidden topic. Perhaps Jesse sensed the palpable
indignation of Matthews and the legions of Media Inc.'s programmed minions
that he represented, forever turning a blind eye to Jesse from that moment on.

Jesse Ventura is nothing if he is not a showman, and it may be possible that
this vision of a future cold-shoulder by the media prompted him to say no
more of 2nd Amendment meanings and the implications they might hold for the
future of America.

Maybe Jesse knows too well the limits imposed by the puppetmasters, and he
knew immediately that he was crossing the line and subjecting himself to
some insidious form of neutralization.

I would prefer to think that Jesse felt he had made his point clearly the
first time, which he really did, but I doubt that that is why he didn't
venture to repeat his statement.

Speaking of governors, what about George Pataki of New York? Elected some
years ago on a platform of reduced government and back-to-earth public
policy, Pataki is now the author of a classic incremental registration and
disarmament bill in the Empire State.

As I happened to click on Pataki's talking head as I was searching the
television for the sanity of any old golf telecast, I was shocked to hear
the once ballyhooed Republican poster boy for government reduction,
espousing inane, illogical, and draconian legislation, having the ultimate
aim of total gun prohibition for all private people.

I always thought Pataki had a kind of a funny look about him, ....slightly
askew, with sort of a crooked sneer cum smile and peculiar and constantly
half-lidded large pop-eyes, but as I watched Pataki basking in the limelight
of live national television, he looked absolutely cartoonish, a la Who
Framed Roger Rabbit?....sort of a cross between a big ham and a lurking
crocodile.

Sure, ....elect Republicans, ....they'll carry the torch of libertyûûûNOT!

If all of this wasn't so damned threatening to America as we once knew it
(....so, I'm old), it might even be laughable. Everything's so damn surreal
anymore, with surveillance cameras everywhere, and ubiquitous biometrics
expanding exponentially, while talking heads on giant screens mouth
statements eerily envisioned decades ago in foreboding fictional works like
Brave New World and 1984.

There's a guy named Dr. Chuck Baldwin who writes columns on the internet
at WorldnetDaily.com, amongst other places, who wrote in a piece there
yesterday a paragraph so succinct and insightful, I am compelled to
reproduce it here (....so sue me).

Herewith, then, from the piece entitled, Only changed hearts can change
America, Dr. Chuck Baldwin:

"A willful rejection of truth permeates the land. Those who speak the truth
are regarded as thickheaded troublemakers. They receive neither praise nor
position. The American people have traded the great themes of freedom (and
those who proclaim them) for a mess of government pottage. The fundamental
principles of America's founding documents are as popular as a case of the
chicken pox. There is no truth so great that it cannot be ignored or any
virtue so noble that it cannot be abolished."

Remember that last line, "There is no truth so great that it cannot be
ignored or any virtue so noble that it cannot be abolished."

It just might save our country.

-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Felony charge for self-defense
Date: 29 Mar 2000 15:15:53 -0700

Don't brandish.

Scott

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


The attachment is my letter to the western Mass. State Police CO. [not
provided] My wife was attacked by a driver in an eighteen-wheeler, and
almost run off the road. As he was coming after her for the fourth time,
she pulled her .38 from her purse, and laid it against the steering wheel.
She has a carry PERmit, has had for 'bout 10 years, and it had exactly
the desired effect, the trucker backed off immediately. She then pulled
into the first place with people and a phone, and the trucker took flight.

She then called the Shelburne State Police barracks, next down the road,
and told them what had transpired. The reaction from the Trooper there was,
"Oh you shouldn't have done that! HE COULD FILE A COMPLAINT AGAINST YOU."
Took her three minutes to get him around to the actions of the trucker,
that MAYBE the State Cops should be looking for that particular fool. So
on she goes, keeping a wary eye out for the truck, and four miles later
pulls into a country store parking lot because there are two cars riding
her bumper; turns out that they are two female state cops, and they start
yelling at her, "Is there a gun in your vehicle, Is there a gun in your
vehicle!!!" In Mass. the mere presence of a firearm in a car does NOT
constitute "Probable cause" that a crime has been committed. It seems that
the trucker pulled up to them, and stated that "...there was a lady back
there that waved a gun at me." Acting solely on that, the Troopers asked
her to get out, asked to search the vehicle, she said No, and they did it
anyway! Found nothing of course.

After a 'pat down' search of my wife, a search of her coat, and the
illegal search of the car, about this time a North Adams Detective shows
up, and begins to berate her, and asks her what she did to PISS HIM OFF,
meaning the trucker. (!!!) He then tells her, "Oh, you can't have a loaded
gun in the car." (When That detective talked to our GOAL-recomended lawyer
the next day, this gomer stated that he "...didn't know much about the gun
laws." In Mass., if you have a carry PERmit. you can have the gun sitting
on your dashboard if you want, as long, I must add, as you are the only
one in the vehicle. Otherwise, you must have the gun, "Under your control."
Vague-but then most of the gun laws are purposely that way, thereby open
to misinterpretation, usually by the 'Law'.

So now these two Trooper airheads think they have something. They MIRANDIZED
my dear wife, and the detective, (and I use the term only as an identifier)
reaches into the car, takes the gun off the seat, and hands it to one of the
Troopers! He heads out, and the Troopers tell Linda that she is free to go,
essentially turning her back on the road..... defenseless. She told them
that if they were going to keep her gun, that she wanted an escort home,
and they refused. (Not too surprised, are we?) She is to be charged with
'Assault with a dangerous weapon'.

My wife stands 5'4", weighs 120 lbs., is an Anesthetic Nurse working in
a Hospital Operating room, has taken the NRA gun safety course, is a
licensed Mass. gunowner. has not even a PARKING TICKET on her record!
and has NEVER drawn her gun, except on the firing range, and would never
even consider it, unless she was terrified. My wife is neither a hothead,
nor is she a coward. I believe her actions to be appropriate and timely.
I believe also that the only reason she is being charged with a FELONY,
is because the cops would 'lose face' otherwise. They don't give one shit
how this is affecting her or anyone else.

We need help here. We are members of GOAL, GOA and JPFO, and we hope
for and expect some assistance. Not monetary neccessarily, but a LARGE
turnout at the arraignment, as would an e-mail back to Linda with
encouragement and support. Her arraignment is to be April 11, at the
North Adams Couthouse at 9 am, and anyone that can be there then would
be very welcome.

Linda and Russ Hamilton  [e-mail]
Phone # [phone]

-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Felony charge for self-defense
Date: 29 Mar 2000 15:51:23 -0700

List owner "Chad Leigh, Shire.Net LLC and Pengar Enterprises, Inc." wrote:

> This doesn't really sound like brandishment, though I am not a lawyer.
> She never took it and presented it in any way to the ahole trucker.
> She merely let him know that she was armed.

Let people assume it. If at all possible don't display a weapon
prior to shooting or aiming it, and never threaten with it unless
holding someone under arrest.

> This is a good reason to h ave a cell phone though.  Call 911 and report
> the trucker and let the Staties show up.  Keep driving and don't stop or
> get out.

Good points.
---
"An armed society is a polite society."
- Robert A. Heinlein in "Beyond This Frontier"

-



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

From:
Subject: Re: Felony charge for self-defense
Date: 29 Mar 2000 18:14:13 -0500

I agree, though what is needed here is a legal definition since we are in
court with the question and not discussing ideal carrying behavior.

Chad

--On Wednesday, March 29, 2000 3:51 PM -0700 Scott Bergeson
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> List owner "Chad Leigh, Shire.Net LLC and Pengar Enterprises, Inc." wrote:
>
>> This doesn't really sound like brandishment, though I am not a lawyer.
>> She never took it and presented it in any way to the ahole trucker.
>> She merely let him know that she was armed.
>
> Let people assume it. If at all possible don't display a weapon
> prior to shooting or aiming it, and never threaten with it unless
> holding someone under arrest.
>
>> This is a good reason to h ave a cell phone though.  Call 911 and report
>> the trucker and let the Staties show up.  Keep driving and don't stop or
>> get out.
>
> Good points.
> ---
> "An armed society is a polite society."
> - Robert A. Heinlein in "Beyond This Frontier"
>
> -
>





-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Professor Joseph Olson Says Boycott S&W
Date: 29 Mar 2000 16:10:30 -0700

The agreement is also available in HTML at:
http://www.hud.gov/pressrel/gunagree.html

-----
Professor Joseph Olson Says Boycott S&W.
for the remainder of 2000. Put THEM out of business.

Please REPOST everywhere.

Smith & Wesson gets 2/3 of its business from the civilian
marketplace. There aren't enough police/military sales to
sustain their business. But, there are plenty of other
firearm makes and models out there. America's gun owners,
put simply, don't need Smith & Wesson.

IF WE ALL STOPPED BUYING NEW S&W FIREARMS,
KNIVES, HATS, AND ACCESSORIES FOR THE REST OF
2000 and 01, THERE WOULD BE NO S&W TO KEEP THE
"DEAL" WITH THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION.

No one has to go without a gun, simply go without a S&W gun.

Even if other manufacturers sell out too, S&W did it first and
their business death will send a message. In fact, I'd even
think about boycotting all "S&W Authorized Dealers" too (since
they won't make legal sales of legal products solely because
they have promised S&W they won't. Well I won't either!).
There are plenty of other dealers hungry for your money.

The S&W CEO was quoted in the WSJ on March 21st saying that,
in effect, gun owners are nuts right now but they will keep
buying S&W products. History may prove him correct - S&W was
the first manufacturer to sell out gun owners in 1968 (the
first federal gun control law) in order to get limits on its
foreign competition and we kept on buying.

Lets fool them all - STOP BUYING NEW S&W PRODUCTS
AT ANY PRICE, FROM ANYONE.

The full text of the S&W agreement is available at:

http://www.isra.org/smithagree.pdf This is the site for the
Illinois State Rifle Association, which is the NRA state
affiliate.

For legislative updates and the full test of the S&W
agreement contact http://www.nealknox.com

It is WORSE that the media has made it out to be. S&W must
be boycotted out of the civilian firearms business.

No manufacturer can make a firearm out of stainless steel
nor apply a corrosion resistant material because no gun can
be "resistent to fingerprints."

No "authorized" dealer can sell LEGAL pre-1994 high capacity
magazines nor sell LEGAL pre-1994 "assault weapons" except,
of course, to the official police of the state.

No "authorized" dealer can sell at any gun show unless every
seller present conducts a background check on every
purchaser whether or not such check is LEGALLY required.

**********************************************************************
Professor Joseph Olson  Hamline University School of Law
phone  [phone]       St. Paul, Minnesota   55104-1284
fax  [phone]            <[e-mail]>

Here is an on-line petition to boycott Smith & Wesson.
Please sign:
http://www.i-charity.net/sw.cgi/ptn/30/tfref/3329

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

-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: 2000 BRAVE NEW SCHOOLS
Date: 30 Mar 2000 09:03:09 -0700

The wonders of publik edyukayshun...
How much of this goes on in Utah?

Scott

THURSDAY MARCH 30

2000 BRAVE NEW SCHOOLS

Sixth grader targeted for pro-gun remarks 'A' student defends 2nd
Amendment, flagged as violence risk..........
By Jon E. Dougherty ⌐ 2000 WorldNetDaily.com

School officials at Harbor Lights Middle School flagged a Holland,
Michigan boy as potentially dangerous because the 12-year-old suggested
to a teacher that one way to prevent school shootings would be to arm
instructors.

Derek Loutzenheiser, a model student who had such good grades that some
teachers recommended he be tested early for a popular standardized
pre-college performance test, made his comments in early March, after
being asked by a social studies teacher what he thought might make kids
safer in school.

Derek had been asked to participate in a classroom discussion about
"school shootings and safety," said the sixth grader's father, Tim
Loutzenheiser.

"My son simply stated that his opinion was that he would feel safer
if some of the adults at the school were trained and allowed to carry
firearms," Mr. Loutzenheiser told WorldNetDaily.

His reply caused him to be "flagged" as a potential violence risk by
teachers and school administrators, who then contacted his parents to
suggest they meet with the school's "Hazard and Risk Assessment Team."

"My wife and I were in disbelief when they (school officials) telephoned
us and told us that's what they wanted to do," Loutzenheiser said. "We
asked, 'Do you have the right kid?'"

In resulting talks with school officials, Loutzenheiser said he learned
that his son "often spoke favorably about the First and Second Amendments,
but the comment he made to his Social Studies teacher was the one that
triggered this action."

School officials told the couple that because of Derek's comments he
should be separated from the other students and forced to enter the
school's "Mentor" program, where he would be studied by an adult
supervisor who would monitor Derek's thought processes.

"We were told that this would be in the best interest of my son, and
by doing this the school would not have to involve Social Services,"
Loutzenheiser said. "We refused."

At that point, the couple contacted an attorney in nearby Grand
Rapids, Michigan -- one referred to them through the National Rifle
Association's Institute for Legislative Action. The couple has also
been told by a representative from the Rutherford Institute, an
international legal and educational civil liberties organization,
that "they would be willing to take on this issue."

Loutzenheiser said when he and his wife, Shelly, arrived for the
Hazard Team meeting Mar. 8, "We were outnumbered 7 to 2." He told
WorldNetDaily that he wanted to make a good first impression with
the members, so he shook each member's hand and introduced himself.

He also told them he had brought along a tape recorder and would be
taping the proceedings since none of the legal organizations that said
they would represent him could send a representative to the meeting on
such short notice.

"My wife and I both saw a transformation from 'smugness' ...
to looks of great concern on some of their faces," he said.

"What was odd about the purpose of this whole meeting," said
Loutzenheiser, "was that three of the team members were Derek's
teachers, and each of them said they didn't know there was any
'situation' with him. That got me to thinking, 'Then why are we here?'"

However, and though "team" members denied it, the elder Loutzenheiser
said he believes teachers and school administrative personnel began to
form a bad impression of his son when, in January of this year, the
sixth grader refused to sign a "Red Letter" vow of peace to celebrate
Martin Luther King's birthday.

"The letter, which was written by the principal," Loutzenheiser said,
"asked the students to take an oath to turn in their friends for
suspicious activity, to vow to never defend themselves if attacked,
and something to the effect of never to use a gun or other weapons.
Derek simply told the principal, 'I'm not signing that.' "I think
that's what got him 'noticed' by some of the administrative staff
at least," he said.

Of the meeting with "team" members, Loutzenheiser said, "We got right
to the point and determined that the charges against my son are without
merit. They all assured me that he is a wonderful student, gets straight
A's, and because he is a little more advanced academically (at their
suggestion he took the ACT test and scored very well) they feel he may
need an 'adult' to talk to about issues."

Loutzenheiser admitted he didn't know what team members were implying
about having Derek "talk to an adult about issues." He added, "We were
able to determine that because my son knows and understands political
and Constitutional issues so well, that he often speaks in terms not
typical of a 12-year-old, and we should be assured they have no issues
with this."

The couple believes Derek's Social Studies teacher was the impetus for the inquiry.

"She felt concern when Derek stated -- when she asked -- that he would
feel safer if some of the adults would be trained and have access to
firearms at school," said Derek's father. "Because this teacher felt
this [was an] irrational threat, she spoke to other 'team' members who
are also Derek's teachers."

The couple said they discovered that there had been a series of similar
misunderstandings involving some of the things Derek had said in school
-- none of which were threatening or dangerous.

One teacher, said Loutzenheiser, stated that he heard Derek speak of
taking the hunter's safety course -- which was offered through the
school -- and that Derek sometimes spoke about how he liked hunting.

Another teacher said that in her class, where his son helps write the
school paper, he was tasked with reviewing a video game. The teacher,
he said, felt that the game might contain violence but didn't feel
"concern" until "after she spoke with the 'team.'"

One of the vice principals, the couple said, also felt Derek may need
some "mentoring" because he was "attacked by three older students last
September, in which Derek fought back and deterred his attackers on
school property," Loutzenheiser said.

"They (school officials) wanted to reinforce how understanding they
were, in light of the fact that the school has a zero tolerance policy
-- no fighting even in self defense -- and how Derek was not punished
in any way for defending himself," Loutzenheiser said.

However, his wife Shelly had inquired of teachers and school officials
just a day before the meeting occurred, and "there were no issues
yesterday, but they seemed to remember some today," he said.

"We also asked them why, if these problems were so terrible, no one
had bothered to pick up the phone and call us before it came to this,"
said Loutzenheiser.

More disturbing to the couple was the school's constant alluding to
"a list" -- ostensibly the same "list" their son, Derek, was on,
albeit briefly.

"No one really explained what this 'list' was," Loutzenheiser said,
"but from the sound of it, if you raised anyone's eyebrows at the
school -- for any reason -- you made this 'list.'"

Jerry Klomparens, principal of Harbor Lights Middle School, told
WorldNetDaily he could not discuss cases or incidents involving
specific children. However, he spoke briefly about the school's
"Mentor Program" policies, and said they were only administered
after school officials obtained permission from a student's parents.

"We believe any educational processes must first come from parents,"
Klomparens said. "This program is only designed to help parents" meet
special needs of certain students.

The principal explained that Harbor Lights uses the mentoring program
to "match students who have particular interests up with teachers or
adults (who are volunteers) who have similar interests."

When asked about the so-called "list" that Loutzenheiser mentioned,
Klomparens reiterated that it was school policy "not to discuss the
status of our students." He also said it was possible that some errors
may have been made in the past in explaining the "mentor" program to
some parents.

"It's not a real formal program," he said, adding that sometimes
teachers suggest students whom they believe would benefit from it.
Other than having mutual interests, Klomparens said neither teacher
nor adult volunteer mentors have received any special training or
qualifications.

But the Loutzenheisers remain unconvinced.

"Each of these people on the 'team' probably had no issue with Derek,
but by virtue of assembling together and talking, they were able to
feed upon each others' concerns, no matter how small, and allowed them
to grow," said Tim Loutzenheiser. "We're convinced that Derek will now
be placed under a microscope for observation more than ever."

Jon E. Dougherty is a staff reporter for WorldNetDaily.


This page was last built 3/29/00; 9:14:20 PM Direct corrections and
technical inquiries to [e-mail] Please direct news
submissions to [e-mail]

-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Heston sees gun fight as part of a larger PC 'cultural war'
Date: 30 Mar 2000 15:38:39 -0700

http://www.washtimes.com/national/default-200033023357.htm

March 30, 2000

Heston sees gun fight as part of a larger PC 'cultural war'

By Robert Stacy McCain
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Defending the right of Americans to own guns is not
"just about guns," but rather is part of a "cultural
war" against political correctness, actor Charlton
Heston said last night.

"What I confronted when I became president of the
[National Rifle Association] is an overwhelming
Orwellian tyranny sweeping this country, a fanatic
fervor of politically correct thought and language,"
Mr. Heston said in a speech at Georgetown University.

The 75-year-old actor, who portrayed Moses in "The
Ten Commandments," said that when he accepted the
presidency of the NRA, he "went straight from Moses
to the devil . . . from celluloid saint to cultural
sinner" according to his critics.

"Get involved with a politically unpopular cause and
you'll quickly find out who your friends are," Mr.
Heston told the audience of more than 700 students
who packed Georgetown's Gaston Hall.

"At first I thought the issue was just about guns,"
he said, adding that he has since learned "that the
gun debate is a lot more complicated."

Having been struck by "the bombshells of the cultural
war," Mr. Heston compared that conflict to the War
Between the States: "Today the battle is for your
hearts and minds, for the freedom to think the way
you choose to think, to follow that moral compass
that points to what's right."

Mr. Heston said his position as NRA president is
based on firm principle.

"I believe very strongly in the Bill of Rights," he
said, "and the Second Amendment provision to keep
and bear arms is one of those rights. . . . Should
law-abiding citizens be able to own them, or should
a Big Brother government say no? Seems simple
enough, right?"

Those who disagree with Mr. Heston were out in force
yesterday at Georgetown, as three Democratic lawmakers
ù Illinois Sen. Richard J. Durbin, Rhode Island Sen.
Jack Reed, and Connecticut Rep. Rosa DeLauro ù spoke
to an anti-gun rally sponsored by the university's
Campus Alliance to End Gun Violence. The alliance
also sponsored a panel discussion on guns yesterday.

Eight television crews were on hand last night for
Mr. Heston's speech, which was sponsored by the
university's Lecture Fund.

Taking questions from students after his speech, Mr.
Heston said he thought Republican candidate George W.
Bush "would be a good president" who would support
the NRA's position on guns.

Emphasizing the importance of this year's election,
Mr. Heston urged students, "Whoever you vote for,
for God's sake vote."

One student prefaced a question by citing a statement
by President Clinton at a news conference yesterday,
prompting Mr. Heston to reply: "I must say, I feel
more comfortable with the opinions of the Founding
Fathers."

In his speech, Mr. Heston urged Georgetown students
to reject political correctness, "a cultural cancer
that is eating away at our society."

"Don't let America's universities serve as incubators
for a rampant epidemic of this new brand of McCarthyism,"
he said.

College students "now appear to be the most socially
conformed and politically silenced generation since
Concord Bridge," he said, referring to the 1775 battle
that opened the American Revolution.

If the Founding Fathers had been "enamored with political
correctness," he said, "we'd still be King George's boys."


All site contents copyright ⌐ 2000 News World Communications, Inc.

-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: L&J: Help Rep. Hostettler Overturn Clinton And Wesson
Date: 30 Mar 2000 11:16:37 -0700

-----

Rep. Hostettler needs your help to overturn the Clinton & Wesson
sell-out -- Prospects for passage are good; but your Rep. must
hear from you!

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

(Wednesday, March 29, 2000) -- Rep. John Hostettler (R-IN) is
leading the charge against the latest unholy alliance to rear its
ugly head. As most activists know, the Clinton administration
struck a deal with Smith & Wesson almost two weeks ago -- an
agreement that not only affects the company itself, but would also
inflict gun control restrictions on private gun buyers and impose
massive red tape on ALL gun sales by retailers that carry S & W
products.

To enforce the Clinton & Wesson deal, an Oversight Commission that
has the force of law will make sure the gun control restrictions
agreed to by S & W are being followed by all dealers doing business
with the company -- restrictions that apply to ALL brands carried by
the dealer, not just the S & W guns that they sell.

But Rep. Hostettler is working to get pro-gun language put in the
budget this year that will put a stop to this insanity. His language
will not only defund the Oversight Commission, it will deny funds
for any future lawsuit by the Clinton administration that would seek
to extort more companies to follow Smith & Wesson's lead.



This Battle Is Definitely Winnable

Two years ago, Senator Bob Smith (R-NH) succeeded in defunding the
FBI's plan to tax gun owners. Smith boldly went to the floor of the
Senate -- where fellow colleagues told him his measure could not
pass. But he ignored the naysayers, forced a vote on his measure,
and accomplished his goal of getting an provision in the budget
withholding funds for an FBI gun tax -- a provision that is still
there to this day.

This budget battle is similar, although it will take a little bit
more work on the part of the grassroots. The House is not like the
Senate; it's not as easy to get amendments put into legislation.
But it can be done!

URGENT ACTION: Please take the time to contact your Representative.
This is super important! If Clinton gets his way and bankrupts the
American firearms industry through lawsuits, how easy will it be for
you to get new firearms? How easy will it be for your children and
grandchildren to buy new firearms in the future? The future of the
Second Amendment is on the line here. Please contact your Rep.
right away!

You can use the text below to fax, email or call your
Representative. Ph) 888-449-3511 (toll-free).


----------- Pre-written message ------------

Dear Representative:

Rep. John Hostettler is trying to get a very important amendment
into the Treasury budget this year. In order to get support from
various Representatives, he is circulating a letter addressed to
appropriations subcommittee Chairman Jim Kolbe. This letter asks
Rep. Kolbe to insert language defunding the Oversight Commission
that was created in the recent Clinton & Wesson agreement. This
Commission has the force of law to make sure the gun control
restrictions agreed to by Smith & Wesson are being followed by
anyone who does business with the company.

I hope you will take the time to sign this very important letter
and support his efforts 100 percent!

The recent Clinton & Wesson agreement is disgusting, and it is
completely out of line with what Americans want. A recent Zogby
poll found that 2/3 of the people say it's illegitimate to bring
lawsuits against gun manufacturers or to hold them liable for the
criminal misuse of guns. And despite what the media seems to think,
people don't want more gun control. Zogby also found that only 29
percent of people would be likely to support a candidate that is a
"supporter of stronger gun controls."

The President's recent deal is nothing but an end-run around the
Constitution. Congress has power to enact laws -- not the President
through the extortion of American businesses. Again, I hope you
will sign the Hostettler letter and do everything you can to stop
this back-door attempt at gun control.

I would also request that you speak to Rep. Kolbe personally and ask
him to put the pro-gun language in the budget. Thank you.

Sincerely,

__________________


**************
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.


_______________________________________________
Liberty-and-Justice mailing list
[e-mail]
http://mailbox.by.net/mailman/listinfo/liberty-and-justice


-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: L&J: Help Rep. Hostettler Overturn Clinton And Wesson
Date: 30 Mar 2000 11:16:37 -0700

-----

Rep. Hostettler needs your help to overturn the Clinton & Wesson
sell-out -- Prospects for passage are good; but your Rep. must
hear from you!

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

(Wednesday, March 29, 2000) -- Rep. John Hostettler (R-IN) is
leading the charge against the latest unholy alliance to rear its
ugly head. As most activists know, the Clinton administration
struck a deal with Smith & Wesson almost two weeks ago -- an
agreement that not only affects the company itself, but would also
inflict gun control restrictions on private gun buyers and impose
massive red tape on ALL gun sales by retailers that carry S & W
products.

To enforce the Clinton & Wesson deal, an Oversight Commission that
has the force of law will make sure the gun control restrictions
agreed to by S & W are being followed by all dealers doing business
with the company -- restrictions that apply to ALL brands carried by
the dealer, not just the S & W guns that they sell.

But Rep. Hostettler is working to get pro-gun language put in the
budget this year that will put a stop to this insanity. His language
will not only defund the Oversight Commission, it will deny funds
for any future lawsuit by the Clinton administration that would seek
to extort more companies to follow Smith & Wesson's lead.



This Battle Is Definitely Winnable

Two years ago, Senator Bob Smith (R-NH) succeeded in defunding the
FBI's plan to tax gun owners. Smith boldly went to the floor of the
Senate -- where fellow colleagues told him his measure could not
pass. But he ignored the naysayers, forced a vote on his measure,
and accomplished his goal of getting an provision in the budget
withholding funds for an FBI gun tax -- a provision that is still
there to this day.

This budget battle is similar, although it will take a little bit
more work on the part of the grassroots. The House is not like the
Senate; it's not as easy to get amendments put into legislation.
But it can be done!

URGENT ACTION: Please take the time to contact your Representative.
This is super important! If Clinton gets his way and bankrupts the
American firearms industry through lawsuits, how easy will it be for
you to get new firearms? How easy will it be for your children and
grandchildren to buy new firearms in the future? The future of the
Second Amendment is on the line here. Please contact your Rep.
right away!

You can use the text below to fax, email or call your
Representative. Ph) 888-449-3511 (toll-free).


----------- Pre-written message ------------

Dear Representative:

Rep. John Hostettler is trying to get a very important amendment
into the Treasury budget this year. In order to get support from
various Representatives, he is circulating a letter addressed to
appropriations subcommittee Chairman Jim Kolbe. This letter asks
Rep. Kolbe to insert language defunding the Oversight Commission
that was created in the recent Clinton & Wesson agreement. This
Commission has the force of law to make sure the gun control
restrictions agreed to by Smith & Wesson are being followed by
anyone who does business with the company.

I hope you will take the time to sign this very important letter
and support his efforts 100 percent!

The recent Clinton & Wesson agreement is disgusting, and it is
completely out of line with what Americans want. A recent Zogby
poll found that 2/3 of the people say it's illegitimate to bring
lawsuits against gun manufacturers or to hold them liable for the
criminal misuse of guns. And despite what the media seems to think,
people don't want more gun control. Zogby also found that only 29
percent of people would be likely to support a candidate that is a
"supporter of stronger gun controls."

The President's recent deal is nothing but an end-run around the
Constitution. Congress has power to enact laws -- not the President
through the extortion of American businesses. Again, I hope you
will sign the Hostettler letter and do everything you can to stop
this back-door attempt at gun control.

I would also request that you speak to Rep. Kolbe personally and ask
him to put the pro-gun language in the budget. Thank you.

Sincerely,

__________________


**************
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.


_______________________________________________
Liberty-and-Justice mailing list
[e-mail]
http://mailbox.by.net/mailman/listinfo/liberty-and-justice


-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: L&J: Help Rep. Hostettler Overturn Clinton And Wesson
Date: 30 Mar 2000 11:16:37 -0700

-----

Rep. Hostettler needs your help to overturn the Clinton & Wesson
sell-out -- Prospects for passage are good; but your Rep. must
hear from you!

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

(Wednesday, March 29, 2000) -- Rep. John Hostettler (R-IN) is
leading the charge against the latest unholy alliance to rear its
ugly head. As most activists know, the Clinton administration
struck a deal with Smith & Wesson almost two weeks ago -- an
agreement that not only affects the company itself, but would also
inflict gun control restrictions on private gun buyers and impose
massive red tape on ALL gun sales by retailers that carry S & W
products.

To enforce the Clinton & Wesson deal, an Oversight Commission that
has the force of law will make sure the gun control restrictions
agreed to by S & W are being followed by all dealers doing business
with the company -- restrictions that apply to ALL brands carried by
the dealer, not just the S & W guns that they sell.

But Rep. Hostettler is working to get pro-gun language put in the
budget this year that will put a stop to this insanity. His language
will not only defund the Oversight Commission, it will deny funds
for any future lawsuit by the Clinton administration that would seek
to extort more companies to follow Smith & Wesson's lead.



This Battle Is Definitely Winnable

Two years ago, Senator Bob Smith (R-NH) succeeded in defunding the
FBI's plan to tax gun owners. Smith boldly went to the floor of the
Senate -- where fellow colleagues told him his measure could not
pass. But he ignored the naysayers, forced a vote on his measure,
and accomplished his goal of getting an provision in the budget
withholding funds for an FBI gun tax -- a provision that is still
there to this day.

This budget battle is similar, although it will take a little bit
more work on the part of the grassroots. The House is not like the
Senate; it's not as easy to get amendments put into legislation.
But it can be done!

URGENT ACTION: Please take the time to contact your Representative.
This is super important! If Clinton gets his way and bankrupts the
American firearms industry through lawsuits, how easy will it be for
you to get new firearms? How easy will it be for your children and
grandchildren to buy new firearms in the future? The future of the
Second Amendment is on the line here. Please contact your Rep.
right away!

You can use the text below to fax, email or call your
Representative. Ph) 888-449-3511 (toll-free).


----------- Pre-written message ------------

Dear Representative:

Rep. John Hostettler is trying to get a very important amendment
into the Treasury budget this year. In order to get support from
various Representatives, he is circulating a letter addressed to
appropriations subcommittee Chairman Jim Kolbe. This letter asks
Rep. Kolbe to insert language defunding the Oversight Commission
that was created in the recent Clinton & Wesson agreement. This
Commission has the force of law to make sure the gun control
restrictions agreed to by Smith & Wesson are being followed by
anyone who does business with the company.

I hope you will take the time to sign this very important letter
and support his efforts 100 percent!

The recent Clinton & Wesson agreement is disgusting, and it is
completely out of line with what Americans want. A recent Zogby
poll found that 2/3 of the people say it's illegitimate to bring
lawsuits against gun manufacturers or to hold them liable for the
criminal misuse of guns. And despite what the media seems to think,
people don't want more gun control. Zogby also found that only 29
percent of people would be likely to support a candidate that is a
"supporter of stronger gun controls."

The President's recent deal is nothing but an end-run around the
Constitution. Congress has power to enact laws -- not the President
through the extortion of American businesses. Again, I hope you
will sign the Hostettler letter and do everything you can to stop
this back-door attempt at gun control.

I would also request that you speak to Rep. Kolbe personally and ask
him to put the pro-gun language in the budget. Thank you.

Sincerely,

__________________


**************
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.


_______________________________________________
Liberty-and-Justice mailing list
[e-mail]
http://mailbox.by.net/mailman/listinfo/liberty-and-justice


-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: What Ever Happened to Fairness and Objectivity?
Date: 31 Mar 2000 08:56:58 -0700

-----

What Ever Happened to Fairness and Objectivity?

When did the news media decide it was time to start making the news
instead of reporting it? The other night I was watching "NBC Nightly News
with Tom Brokaw". The news started out with the usual happenings of the
day...a story about Elain Gonzalez..a story about trying to balance work and
family..and a few other news items. Following these stories was the featured
story of the night, the "in depth" report. The in depth report was titled:
"Crusader Plans Million Mom March". It then went on to tell the story of
Donna Dees Thomasses and her "crusade" against "the gun lobby". The story
touted the actions of this New Jersey suburbs mother of two daughters and
what she is doing to toughen gun laws. The story was one of the longest of
the night, and was placed at the end of the broadcast in a position of
importance. So what's the problem?

One-sided reporting.

Not once in this "in depth" report was anyone allowed to say anything
positive about guns or gun owners, and the story was full of a number of
subtle and not so subtle put downs of those who disagree with the positions
of this woman. Let me mention just a few lines from the story as it was
later published on NBC's web site.

The story started out with a recently release study by the American Journal
of Public Health. And I quote, "..of the households with a least one firearm
and children under age 18 living in the home, 43 percent keep a gun without
a trigger lock in an unlocked place. And more than 9 percent said they keep
their guns unlocked and loaded despite the presence of children."

In response to this figures, let me quote Mark Twain, "there are three
types of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics". The "American Journal of
Public Health". It sounds scientific and scholarly, and in that subtle
deception lies the problem. The way NBC presented these numbers-- without
telling its audience how these statistics were actually obtained, or if the
population who was most likely simply surveyed was big enough to represent
a large enough sample size to even be relevant--it seemed as if an evil was
occurring in "43 percent" of homes where guns were present. Homes without
gun locks. The horror! If these numbers are actually true (which is doubtful),
most of these "gun lock free" homes probably represent homes in which parents
still teach their children the proper respect for firearms. I grew up in a
home where a gun was kept "without a trigger lock in an unlocked place" and
the bullets were always around. Did we ever have a problem? Of course not.
Because my father actually taught me and my brothers and sisters a thing or
two. When I ask anti-gun zealots what the difference is between the home I
grew up in and homes where gun accidents have occurred, I usually receive
nothing but a blank stare on a face that is starting to turn red with anger
or frustration. But did NBC bother to mention the responsible gun owners
who fall under the blanket of their statistics? No, they'd rather have you
believe that their numbers and the implied anti-gun connotation are simply
true, and only a fool would question information that is "scientific".

I could go on and on about how supposedly reputable journals, like the
"American Journal of Public Health" are actually in the policy making
business as opposed to being worried about truth and science, but instead
let me focus on a more important point. NBC never countered these numbers
with any pro-gun/pro-second Amendment numbers at all.

Let's look at a few more lines from the story.

"No one ever turns out for rallies about gun control -- that's what I was
told," Dees-Thomasses said. Undaunted, she decided to do the march herself
even though she admitted the biggest thing she'd ever organized was a
carpool. "It is moms in every town across America working, putting up
flyers in coffee shops and beauty salons," said Dees-Thomasses. "You know
you get a group of women and look what they can do. A small group of women,
they can really change the world."

Good job Donna Thomasses. A small group of women can really change the world.
But does NBC news talk about that change? No. Because everyone already knows
what they think. It is for the better. Fortunately, not all Americans, myself
being one of them, think that having a woman crusader hell-bent on weakening
the Second Amendment is a good thing. NBC's story goes on to quote this woman
saying things like, "Yes, that's her [referring to her adorable little
daughter] slogan. ΓÇÿFlowers are good and guns are bad." And the anti-gun
crowds recent favorite argument, "There's no reason why you can't treat a
handgun like you do an automobile. That as a handgun owner, that you should
get a license." NBC even features a "Republican" Dana Quist saying, "We don't
want to have to bury anymore children. We bury twelve children a day [another
false liberal "statistic"]! That's obscene, that's ridiculous!"

Actually, what is obscene and ridiculous is NBC one-sided story and the
markedly untrue and misleading information they pump out on a nightly basis.
So where is the rest of the story, you might ask? That's it! Not one part of
the story represented or even attempted to represent the pro-Second Amendment
side of the issue. NBC even had the audacity to end their story with the
line: "Now this suburban mom says her mission won't end with the march, not
until the mothers of America face down the gun lobby and win." As if every
American mother now supports the destruction of the Second Amendment and the
only supporters of those evil guns are "the gun lobby" and not millions of
citizens who still believe in the ideals of the founding fathers. And the
problem is with more than NBC.

According to a recent report by the Media Research Center, between July
1st 1997 and June 30th 1999, stories advocating more gun-control that ran
on ABC, CBS, CNN, and NBC outnumbered stories opposing more gun-control
357 to 36. Every American should be asking him or herself a question:
If a position is true and right, does that position require one-sided
reporting so biased as to be approaching propaganda in order to sway
people in that positions direction? The "hard sell" is only required when
a customer has no desire to buy the goods. And such is the approach of
the gun-control sell being thrown onto the American public. All this
brings me to a few final questions:

What happened to the journalists of the 40s and 50s, back when reporters
were supposed to be objective? What ever happened to real reporters?

Has the once honorable title of "journalist" been replaced by a title the
news networks dare not speak? That of manipulating propagandist? Actually,
I think there are still a lot of real reporters out there; many reporting
for small, local newspapers and many are on the net; they just can't get
jobs with major or even minor networks anymore, because as the Media
Research Group says, "the mainstream media has already chosen sides on the
gun issue." Unfortunately, when it comes to old-fashioned journalistic
principles like truth and fairness, these so called "reporters" have
chosen the other side.

Christopher Cook
Constitutional American. Still free and at large.

Here's a link to check out...a group that is actively fighting the
lies and misinformation. <A HREF="http://www.eaglesup.com/trt.html">
Click here: WELCOME TYRANNY RESPONSE TEAM</A>

-



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

From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: Letter to Sen. Hatch
Date: 31 Mar 2000 11:58:50 -0700

-----
CC: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

Senator Hatch:

It grieves me to have to write you to express my disdain over your support
of gun control.

I helped send you to Washington because you originally represented my
principles. As I continued to support you in your re-elections, you have
drifted continually to the right.

Specifically, I noticed in 1993 you started to abandon the values that got
you to the senate originally by voting for the Democrat "crime bill" that
banned many semi auto firearms. This bill was introduced by Dianne
Feinstein. The list goes on from there. In 1995 you introduced S.3 that
would have been a slam on our 4th amendment protection. Fortunately, wiser
minds prevailed and this bill failed. Do you recall sponsoring S.735 in
1995? How about in 1996 voting for the Lautenberg domestic gun ban? In the
'97-'98 session you voted to seat Margaret Morrow on the federal bench. I
was aware she was anti-gun and believe you knew this too. But you voted to
seat her anyway. That leads to your assistance in seating Ruth Ginsburg and
Stephen Breyer to the Supreme Court. In 1998 you introduced S. 10. Why do
you suppose it was referred to as Hatch's Horror Bill? Fortunately again,
wiser minds prevailed and time ran out. But you were not deterred, and this
year brought S. 254 back to life.

Sir: Can you explain to me how any of these bills would have stopped the
tragedies that provided the political opportunity you and others seized in
order to promote you careers. How does a trigger lock requirement or a ban
on private sales at a gun show stop two evil students determined to take
lives of other students. A young boy is a product of a broken home, left
with a relative who resides at a "crack house". He takes a pistol from
"home" to school and kills a little girl who is his 1st. grade classmate.
The answer is to give the residents of the crack house trigger locks?

Where was your voice when Bill Clinton should have been on the ropes during
the impeachment hearings? He was not even tried on the crimes he should
have been. It may have been expedient to try him on lesser charges and find
him not guilty in order to keep Al Gore from being President and hence being
an incumbent during this election time. In my eyes, it is not honorable.
By the way, were you entertaining presidential prospects at that time?

I notice now that election time is nearing, you are standing by the NRA
instead of your liberal friends. Who are you really? If I may plagiarize
part of an old saying-will the real Senator Hatch please stand up.

Senator Hatch, I call on you to right the wrongs that you have caused law
abiding firearm owners to suffer. I ask you to lay out a responsible agenda
to reverse the years of "bad law" that are preemptive against law abiding
citizens and unconstitutional in nature.

I offer a few of suggestions for your consideration:
A resolution honoring the 2nd Amendment and it's guarantee of an individual
to keep and bear arms.
Withdraw the gun control provisions in the Juvenile Justice Bill.
A law against government suites against private companies based on improper
use of their product to accomplish unlawful acts.
How about eliminating about 21,900 gun control laws. Doesn't it make more
sense to hold people responsible for the own actions, not for lawless
actions of others?
No more gun control.

I am a state delegate from Box Elder County for the Republican party. On May
6, 2000, myself and some friends who are delegates also, will be voting for
the republican senate candidate who will be on the Utah ballot in November.
Will you take the time to respond to this letter and tell me and in turn
others why you deserve our vote at the convention next month and our trust
for the next 6 years?

Sincerely,

Douglas E. Christiansen

-