ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/utah-firearms/archive/v02.n025

Internet Message Format | 1998-02-19 | 44KB

From: [e-mail] (utah-firearms-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: utah-firearms-digest V2 #25
Reply-To: utah-firearms-digest
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


utah-firearms-digest     Friday, February 20 1998     Volume 02 : Number 025




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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 09:59:01 -0700
From: DAVID SAGERS <[e-mail]>
Subject: Pro-gun Rep. Assaulted -Forwarded

Received: (from smap@localhost) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id WAA19749; Tue, 17 Feb 1998 22:23:04 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 22:23:04 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1) by fs1.mainstream.net via smap (V1.3)
    id sma019560; Tue Feb 17 22:20:11 1998
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Originator: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk
From: Douglas Davis <[e-mail]>
To: Multiple recipients of list <[e-mail]>
Subject: Pro-gun Rep. Assaulted
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list

>Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
>Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 16:40:07 -0500
>From: Gun Owners of America <[e-mail]>
>Reply-To: Gun Owners of America <[e-mail]>
>To: [e-mail]
>Subject: Pro-gun Rep. Assaulted
>
>Vermont Carry Bill Sponsor Assaulted By Anti-gun Legislator
>
>Gun Owners of America E-Mail/FAX Alert
>8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
>Phone: [phone] / FAX: [phone]
>http://www.gunowners.org
>
>Multi-state Alert: February 17, 1998
>
>
>Representative Lisa Lutz, the sponsor of the Vermont-style
>Carry Bill for New Mexico (HB 296) must be getting the
>attention of the enemy. While sitting in a House
>Appropriations Committee meeting on February 11th,
>Representative James G. Taylor, the anti-gun water boy for
>Speaker Raymond Sanchez, walked up behind her and slapped
>her on the back of the head!
>
>GOA's State and Local Affairs Director Dennis Fusaro, who
>witnessed the incident, was shocked. "What is this?" said
>Fusaro, "The New Mexico House, or Animal House?" Lutz asked
>Fusaro not to act on his first impulse and return the favor
>to Taylor. GOA members need not exercise similar restraint
>in expressing their (1st Amd) outrage at this kind of
>thuggery.
>
>
>When a Vermont-style carry law was introduced in Oregon, its
>sponsor, Representative Patti Milne, was verbally abused by
>anti-gun House Rep. George Eighmey.
>
>Oregon GOA members were alerted and flooded Eighmey with
>calls, faxes and E-mails. At the second hearing for the bill
>Eighmey publicly apologized and credited GOA members for
>"showing him the light."
>
>Taylor's physical abuse calls for no less of a response.
>Let's show Taylor the same light Oregon members showed
>Eighmey. Contact Taylor and Speaker Sanchez and tell them
>what you think of Taylor's outrageous behavior.
>
>The numbers for Rep. Taylor are:
>[phone]. (Legislature)
>[phone] (Buisiness)
>[phone] (Home)
>
>The numbers for Speaker Sanchez are:
>[phone] (Legislature)
>[phone] (Business)
>[phone] (Home)
>
>Both can be faxed at [phone]
>
>While you're at it, Contact Representative Lutz and let her
>know what a great job she's doing. Representative Lutz can be
>reached at: [phone]. Tell the Republican Leadership the
>same thing: [phone]/4757.
>
>You can and should call even if you don't live in New Mexico.
>New Mexico's Speaker needs to know the word is spreading to
>other states about the kind of nonsense he is letting happen.
>General Information Line is [phone].
>
>Any ?s Call GOA
>Guns Save Lives
>
>***********************************************************
>Are you receiving this as a cross-post? To be certain of
>getting up-to-the-minute information, please consider
>joining the GOA E-mail Alert Network directly. The service
>is free, your address remains confidential, and the volume
>is quite low: five messages a week would be a busy week
>indeed. To subscribe, simply send a message (or forward
>this notice) to [e-mail] and include your
>state of residence in either the subject line or the body.
******************
Firearms, self-defense, and other information, with LINKS are
available at: http://shell.rmi.net/~davisda  Latest additions are
found in the group NEW with GOA and other alerts under the
heading ALERTS. For those without browser capabilities, send
[request index.txt] to [e-mail] and an index of the files
at this site will be e-mailed to you. Then send [request <filename>]
and the requested file will be sent as a message.
Various shareware programs are archived at:
ftp://shell.rmi.net/pub2/davisda To receive the contents of the
FTP site, send [request index.ftp] to [e-mail]
********************



- -

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 10:22:04 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Charles Hardy)
Subject: Careful when responding to "police" at door

[Image]
[Image]

      [Image]

      Millcreek man shot in leg during break-in attempt
      [Image]
      [Image]

      [Image]
      Last updated 02/17/1998, 11:50 a.m. MT

            MILLCREEK ù A man was shot in the leg while three masked
      assailants tried to break into his house Monday night.
            Paramedics transported the man to Columbia-St. Mark's Hospital,
      where he was in good condition, said Salt Lake County sheriff's deputy
      Peggy Faulkner. His name was not released Monday night.
            The assailants knocked on the front door of the house, 1128 E.
      Elgin Ave. (3000 South), about 10:30 p.m. When no one answered the
      door, the assailants pounded on the back door.
            "They told the residents they were deputies from the sheriff's
      department," Faulkner said.
            The homeowners thought it was some friends playing a joke. Two
      men live in the house, Faulkner said. The residents opened the door
      and quickly closed it when they saw one man pointing a shotgun at
      them.
            The gunman took one shot through the door after it slammed shut,
      hitting one of the residents in the leg. No other shots were fired,
      Faulkner said.
            The other resident called 911, Faulkner said. The perpetrators
      ran down the street and sped off in a car after the homeowner told
      them police were on the way.
            Investigators weren't sure if the assailants picked the house at
      random, Faulkner said. The assailants were still at large Tuesday.
      [Image]
      [Image]

      Return to front page
[Image]


- --

Charles C. Hardy        | If my employer has an opinion on
<[e-mail]>            | these things I'm fairly certain
801.588.7200 (work)        | I'm not the one he'd have express it.

"The prohibition is general. No clause in the Constitution could by rule
 of construction be conceived to give the Congress the power to disarm
 the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some
 general pretense by a state legislature. But if in blind pursuit of
 inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be
 appealed to as a restraint on both." -- William Rawle, 1825; considered
 academically to be an expert commentator on the Constitution. He was
 offered the position of the first Attorney General of the United States,
 by President Washington.

- -

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 10:24:20 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Charles Hardy)
Subject: 1984?

Several troubling items in this one...

Wonder if frequent trips to the range with scary looking guns qualifies
one for a police checkup...

                                [Image]
 [Image] [Image]      Wednesday, February 18, 1998     [Image] [Image]

                     Rolly & Wells: 1984 Revisited?

 By Paul Rolly and JoAnn
 Jacobsen-Wells

     1984 REVISITED?
     The Salt Lake County Sheriff's Office ran an ad in The Salt Lake
 Tribune Sunday with the title ``Big Crime Produces Big Wealth.''
     The ad listed a hot line residents may call anonymously about
 their neighbors if they notice strange visitors at unusual hours,
 suspicious stories about sources of income or jobs, lavish spending
 habits and working unusual hours.
     Sheriff's Sgt. Craig Watson said honest residents need not worry
 about unwarranted investigations. Watson, a narcotics investigator,
 said the department is going after the ``top of the food chain'' of
 drug traffickers, who usually pose as respectable, wealthy
 individuals. If a check shows the subject has a legitimate job, the
 investigation will end.
     But the ad ruffled some feathers, even among law enforcement,
 possibly because it came on the heels of an incident earlier this
 month when the Sheriff's Office checked license plates of cars parked
 at the South Jordan Library.
     Former Deputy Scott Miller, who plans to run for election against
 Sheriff Aaron Kennard, was holding a political meeting there.
     Among those checked: Two Granite School District undercover
 officers and a State Tax Commission investigator.
     Undersheriff Jim Bell, who asked for the investigation to find
 out who belonged to the license plates, said he made the inquiry
 because of an anonymous letter complaining of reckless driving in the
 area.
     But the timing of his inquiry means he would have had to receive
 that anonymous letter less than 24 hours from when the cars were in
 the area.

     BITE OUT OF CRIME
     Friday night, House Minority Leader Dave Jones and his wife,
 Cindy, were at Crossroads Plaza in Salt Lake City when they spotted a
 man attacking a woman near the basement rest-rooms. Jones, D-Salt
 Lake City, tackled the suspect, who was then arrested by his wife, a
 state correctional officer with the Domestic Violence Unit.

     CHECK THE FILE?
     William Flandro reported Jan. 10 to the West Valley City police
 that his 1989 Ford Probe was stolen. The car was placed on a national
 register of missing vehicles.
     Two days later, the Probe was found abandoned in the middle of
 the road in Spanish Fork Canyon by Utah Department of Motor Vehicles
 crews. UHP had it towed to an impound lot in Spanish Fork.
     No one notified Flandro or West Valley City detectives until
 Thursday, when Flandro received a letter from UHP stating his
 ``unclaimed vehicle'' had been in impound for a month and he owed
 $560.

     TRUCK DRIVERS BEWARE
     But diligent law enforcement may be seen in areas that attract
 federal dollars.
     We wrote last week about alleged quotas for DUIs being required
 of Utah Highway Patrol troopers, despite an official denial that
 quotas exist.
     There seems to be another area where quotas are required of UHP
 troopers.
     An Aug. 24, 1997, memo to UHP sergeants in the Salt Lake County
 district notes:
     ``The Federal Highway Administration has offered $81,000 to the
 Utah Highway Patrol for CDL [Commercial Driver's License]
 enforcement. Six dollars per CDL citation or warning will be given to
 the UHP. [Salt Lake County] has been tasked with 1,125 CDL citations
 or warnings. The following is a breakdown of our current stats on
 CDLs: Total [CDL tickets or warnings] as of Aug. 15 -- 490. Number
 needed by Sept. 30 -- 635. Number needed per trooper -- 15.''
     The memo did not address the question: What if truck drivers
 don't commit 635 offenses in the alloted time?



              [Image] [Wednesday Navigation Bar]  [Image]

                                [Image]

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

 ⌐ Copyright 1998, The Salt Lake Tribune

 All material found on Utah OnLine is copyrighted The Salt Lake
 Tribune and associated news services. No material may be reproduced
 or reused without explicit permission from The Salt Lake Tribune.
           --------------------------------------------------
     Contact The Salt Lake Tribune or Utah OnLine by clicking here.


- --

Charles C. Hardy        | If my employer has an opinion on
<[e-mail]>            | these things I'm fairly certain
801.588.7200 (work)        | I'm not the one he'd have express it.

"The prohibition is general. No clause in the Constitution could by rule
 of construction be conceived to give the Congress the power to disarm
 the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some
 general pretense by a state legislature. But if in blind pursuit of
 inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be
 appealed to as a restraint on both." -- William Rawle, 1825; considered
 academically to be an expert commentator on the Constitution. He was
 offered the position of the first Attorney General of the United States,
 by President Washington.

- -

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 10:26:19 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Charles Hardy)
Subject: Sarah's Letter

From today's DesNews...

Great letter Sarah.

[Image]
[Image]

      [Image]

      READERS' FORUM
      [Image]
      Firearms bill goes too far
      [Image]
      [Image]

      [Image]
      Last updated 02/18/1998, 10:02 a.m. MT

            Your editorial (Feb. 8) urging support for Senate President Lane
      Beattie's SB57 is both irresponsible and reprehensible.
            Beattie's bill would not, as you falsely inform your readers,
      "allow church leaders, private property owners and public school
      officials to ban concealed weapon permit holders from bringing
      firearms into their buildings." It would absolutely prohibit the
      possession of firearms on these premises, and the churches and private
      property owners would have no discretion whatsoever. Prohibition is
      not the same thing as choice.
            This mistake is quite understandable since you both wrote and
      published your editorial days before the actual text of the
      legislation was available. While you are entitled to your opinions, I
      wish you would have the journalistic integrity to base your opinions
      on facts and not rumors.
            Both Utah and the LDS Church have long been known for their
      religious tolerance and adherence to the principle of separation of
      church and state. This is a worthy tradition, which should be held
      sacred.
            Beattie's bill would set a heinous precedent for intrusion of
      the state into church matters. If the state may prohibit firearms from
      the premises of a house of worship regardless of the wishes of the
      religion or clergy involved, all religious freedom is endangered. If
      the state may force a church to ban guns, what is to stop it from
      banning sacramental wine or requiring that Muslims wear shoes during
      prayer? What is to stop it from mandating birth control or equal
      religious standing for homosexuals?
            If a house of worship wishes to ban guns or even require guns,
      let it do so on its own authority. Religious practices are not the
      domain of the state.
            All Utahns who support religious freedom should vigorously
      oppose SB57.

      Sarah Thompson
      Sandy
      [Image]
      [Image]

      Return to front page
[Image]


- --

Charles C. Hardy        | If my employer has an opinion on
<[e-mail]>            | these things I'm fairly certain
801.588.7200 (work)        | I'm not the one he'd have express it.

"The prohibition is general. No clause in the Constitution could by rule
 of construction be conceived to give the Congress the power to disarm
 the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some
 general pretense by a state legislature. But if in blind pursuit of
 inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be
 appealed to as a restraint on both." -- William Rawle, 1825; considered
 academically to be an expert commentator on the Constitution. He was
 offered the position of the first Attorney General of the United States,
 by President Washington.

- -

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 11:13:29 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Charles Hardy)
Subject: Need Chris Kierst's email

Chris, need to email you privately but have misplaced your address.

Please respond to <[e-mail]>.

Thanks.

- --

Charles C. Hardy        | If my employer has an opinion on
<[e-mail]>            | these things I'm fairly certain
801.588.7200 (work)        | I'm not the one he'd have express it.

"The prohibition is general. No clause in the Constitution could by rule
 of construction be conceived to give the Congress the power to disarm
 the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some
 general pretense by a state legislature. But if in blind pursuit of
 inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be
 appealed to as a restraint on both." -- William Rawle, 1825; considered
 academically to be an expert commentator on the Constitution. He was
 offered the position of the first Attorney General of the United States,
 by President Washington.

- -

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 11:35:19 -0700
From: Will Thompson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 1984?

Charles Hardy wrote:
>
> Several troubling items in this one...
>
> Wonder if frequent trips to the range with scary looking guns qualifies
> one for a police checkup...
>
>                                 [Image]
>  [Image] [Image]      Wednesday, February 18, 1998     [Image] [Image]
>
>                      Rolly & Wells: 1984 Revisited?
>
>  By Paul Rolly and JoAnn
>  Jacobsen-Wells
>
>      1984 REVISITED?
>      The Salt Lake County Sheriff's Office ran an ad in The Salt Lake
>  Tribune Sunday with the title ``Big Crime Produces Big Wealth.''
[snip]
>      Undersheriff Jim Bell, who asked for the investigation to find
>  out who belonged to the license plates, said he made the inquiry
>  because of an anonymous letter complaining of reckless driving in the
>  area.

Good ol' Bell...this is the same (sixties minutia) who said he'd
make you eat dirt then ask questions if he saw a suspicious bulge
in yer drawers.  Is anyone surprised that he'd be involved in
another form of "big bro" activity?  "By their fruits they
shall be known"  <-Someone who knows better, please correct this?

- -

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 11:37:34 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Charles Hardy)
Subject: Re: 1984?

On Wed, 18 Feb 1998,  Will Thompson <[e-mail]> posted:

>>      Undersheriff Jim Bell, who asked for the investigation to find
>>  out who belonged to the license plates, said he made the inquiry
>>  because of an anonymous letter complaining of reckless driving in the
>>  area.
>
>Good ol' Bell...this is the same (sixties minutia) who said he'd
>make you eat dirt then ask questions if he saw a suspicious bulge
>in yer drawers.  Is anyone surprised that he'd be involved in
>another form of "big bro" activity?  "By their fruits they
>shall be known"  <-Someone who knows better, please correct this?
>

OK, correction.  That was officer D.B. Bell of the SLC PD.

- --

Charles C. Hardy        | If my employer has an opinion on
<[e-mail]>            | these things I'm fairly certain
801.588.7200 (work)        | I'm not the one he'd have express it.

"The prohibition is general. No clause in the Constitution could by rule
 of construction be conceived to give the Congress the power to disarm
 the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some
 general pretense by a state legislature. But if in blind pursuit of
 inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be
 appealed to as a restraint on both." -- William Rawle, 1825; considered
 academically to be an expert commentator on the Constitution. He was
 offered the position of the first Attorney General of the United States,
 by President Washington.

- -

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 12:05:31 -0700
From: Will Thompson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 1984?

Charles Hardy wrote:
>
> On Wed, 18 Feb 1998,  Will Thompson <[e-mail]> posted:
>
> >>      Undersheriff Jim Bell, who asked for the investigation to find
> >>  out who belonged to the license plates, said he made the inquiry
> >>  because of an anonymous letter complaining of reckless driving in the
> >>  area.
> >
> >Good ol' Bell...this is the same (sixties minutia) who said he'd
> >make you eat dirt then ask questions if he saw a suspicious bulge
> >in yer drawers.  Is anyone surprised that he'd be involved in
> >another form of "big bro" activity?  "By their fruits they
> >shall be known"  <-Someone who knows better, please correct this?
> >
>
> OK, correction.  That was officer D.B. Bell of the SLC PD.
>
er...

Yup
apologies to Undersheriff Bell for the mistaken ID.
> --
>

- -

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 15:05:42 -0700
From: "S. Thompson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: HB 328

At 09:45 AM 2/18/98 -0700, you wrote:
>
>It appears from the State legislature home page that the house passed
>HB 328, these people must be eating prunes, they'll pass anything!
>
>Contact your Senator.
>

The bill is now in Senate Judiciary.

Members are:
Craig Taylor, Chair
Lane Beattie
David Buhler
Mike Dmitrich
Lyle Hillyard
Robert Steiner

Messages may be left for Senators at 538-1035, or 800-953-8824.

Democrat fax: [phone]
Republican fax: [phone]

Please save these names and numbers because the same committee will be
hearing SB 57, Lane Beattie's gun control bill.  However, please DO NOT
include both issues in the same message, since HB 328 is really a
non-partisan issue, while gun control arouses strong feelings in this
committee.

Sarah Thompson
(for myself only)

- -

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 16:53:30 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Charles Hardy)
Subject: [[e-mail]: SB57 Press Release]

From the Utah-Libertarian Party concerning SB57.

- ----BEGIN FORWARDED MESSGE----

    Government Wants To Make Criminals of Law-Abiding Citizens

  SALT LAKE CITY, UT -- If you want to reduce crime, let more people
carry more concealed weapons too more places, the Libertarian Party of
Utah said today, but if you want to turn law-abiding citizens into
criminals just pass Senate Bill 57, sponsored by Lane Beattie.

  "Mindless gun control is one of the best examples of government
enacting laws that force citizens to either to put themselves in
danger or become lawbreakers," proclaimed Jim Dexter, the party's
state chair. Libertarians oppose SB57 because it would make the
licensed possession of a concealed weapon illegal in houses of
worship, schools, and private residences.

  "New laws are entirely unnecessary," said Dexter, pointing out that
houses of worship and homeowners already have the right to ban or
prohibit concealed weapons from entering their property.  "The LDS
Church has correctly stated that concealed weapons in church are
'inappropriate'," Dexter noted, "and they could easily disfellowship
or excommunicate a violator of their internal policy if they felt it
was a real problem."

  "Perhaps the church authorities have forgotten the June 11, 1995
incident in a West Valley City wardhouse when a wife was kidnapped at
gun point by her estranged husband. The unarmed congregation could do
nothing to stop him."  Dexter said.

 "The inability to respond in kind also applies to the two recent
cases in our Utah government schools where children brought stolen
guns to school knowing no adult would be able to stop them because of
misguided school policy. And let's not forget the recent rash of armed
robberies on the U of U campus."

  "The effect of these bills would be to create areas where only
crimnals would be safe. People who live in high crime neighborhoods
would be forced to choose between meeting their spiritual needs and
protecting their lives. Co- eds would not be safe from rape on campus
and teachers would not be safe in classrooms," said Dexter.

  Libertarians also believe forcing churches to take a stand on
concealed carry is unconstitutional, as a separation of church and
state should allow houses of worship to set their own policies, free
from government coercion.  Dexter asks, "What good is a concealed
carry permit if you are not allowed to carry or turned into a criminal
for carrying? Trying to fix a law that's not broken is
silly. Legislation like this only serves to turn otherwise law-
abiding citizens into criminals."

  Dexter also said there is absolutely no proof that Utah's concealed
carry permit holders have posed the slightest risk to anyone's health,
safety or the public good under current law. Utah's violent crime rate
has dropped an average 8%, despite population increases, since Utah's
concealed carry law went into effect. This follows the pattern in
other states that have permitted their law-abiding citizens the right
of armed self-defense, according to recent studies from Professors
Lott and Mustard of the University of Chicago and from the Cato
Institute.

  Dexter said, "Restricting our right to carry concealed weapons and
the places we may carry them, is the equivalent of politicians
painting targets on our backs. Denying terrified Utahns the right to
carry a concealed weapon into well-publicized 'gun-free zones' is like
sentencing innocent people to death because they can't legally defend
themselves. When will our legislators learn that criminals don't obey
any laws . . . especially gun laws."

 Speaking of not obeying laws, the Libertarian Party of Utah urges the
legislature and law enforcement to require the governor and UofU
authorities to immediately cease their resistance to the concealed
carry laws and restore the basic right of self-defense to all
government workers, teachers and adult students. "If the chancellor or
the governor have to face criminal charges, so be it. We are a nation
of laws, not subject to the personal likes and dislikes of politicians
and/or academicians," said Dexter.

- ----END FORWARDED MESSAGE----

- --

Charles C. Hardy        | If my employer has an opinion on
<[e-mail]>            | these things I'm fairly certain
801.588.7200 (work)        | I'm not the one he'd have express it.

"The American Revolution was a beginning, not a consummation." --
 Woodrow Wilson, 28th President of the United States (1856-1924).

- -

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

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 20:12:40 -0700
From: "S. Thompson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: URGENT ALERT!  STOP SB 57!!

    ************PLEASE CROSSPOST and DISTRIBUTE!!**************

Lane Beattie's SB 57, Concealed Firearms Amendments, has now been sent to
the Senate Judiciary Committee.  It is scheduled to be heard on Friday Feb.
20, at 8 AM, in Room 403 at the State Capitol.  This bill MUST be stopped!

IMMEDIATE ACTION IS NECESSARY!

1) PLEASE PLAN ON ATTENDING THE COMMITTEE HEARING!  I know most of you have
to work, but the bill is first on the agenda, so you can probably show up
before work.


2) PLEASE CONTACT MEMBERS OF THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE AND ASK THEM TO
OPPOSE SB 57 and OPPOSE ANY AMENDMENTS.
Members of the committee are:

Sen. Craig Taylor - R, Chair, O-544-5909  No home number.  No personal fax.
 Email: [e-mail]

Sen. Lane Beattie - R, Sponsor of the bill and Senate President, H-292-7406
O-298-7000  No personal fax.  No email.

Sen. David Buhler - R, H-466-7140 O-355-5009 FAX-355-4008
Email: [e-mail]

Sen. Mike Dmitrich - D, H-637-0426 O-637-2875  No personal fax
Email: [e-mail]

Sen. Lyle Hillyard - R, Assistant Majority Whip, H-753-0043 O-752-2610,  No
personal fax.
Email: [e-mail]

Sen. Robert Steiner - D  H-596-1213 O-328-8831  No personal fax
Email: [e-mail]

Note:  All Senators can be reached at the Capitol at 801-538-1035 or
800-953-8824.
Faxes for Republicans can be sent to: 801-538-1414
Faxes for Democrats can be sent to: 801-538-1449


3) PLEASE CONTACT YOUR OWN STATE SENATOR AND LET HIM/HER KNOW THAT YOU
OPPOSE THIS BILL, AND WOULD LIKE IT DEFEATED, NOT AMENDED.
     If you don't know who your Senator is, call 468-3427.  (They can also
tell you who your Representative is.)  If you go to
http://www.senate.le.state.ut.us/ you can look under "District Map" to
locate your Senator and under "Roster" to find contact information.  Some
of the Senators have e-mail, but not all of them check it regularly.  You
can leave a message for any Senator at 801-538-1035, or 800-953-8824.  You
can fax Democratic Senators at 801-538-1449, and Republican Senators at
801-538-1414.


4) PLEASE FORWARD OR OTHERWISE DISTRIBUTE THIS MESSAGE TO EVERYONE WHO
VALUES FIREARMS RIGHTS  OR RELIGIOUS FREEDOM IN UTAH.


Thank you for your support.  This is the BIG ONE, so we need to work
together to protect our rights!

Following is USSC's analysis of the bill, as previously posted.

HELP DEFEAT SB 57!!!

SB 57, Concealed Firearms Amendments, introduced by Senate President Lane
Beattie
is a bad bill for many reasons:
First of all, contrary to the title of the bill, it is NOT only about
concealed weapons.  The bill refers to "dangerous weapons".  This includes
concealed pistols, of course, but also includes knives, long guns, and
virtually anything else that can cause bodily injury.

1. It prohibits firearms (and dangerous weapons) on church (or other house
of worship) property, regardless of the wishes of that particular church.
a) This sets a dangerous precedent of allowing the State to dictate to a
church or religion what it is or is not allowed to do.  It is not the
business of the state to dictate religious practices.
b) The "defense to prosecution" clause is essentially meaningless.  It
provides that  the police may enter a church, haul you out in handcuffs,
(shoot you if you resist or if they're particularly worried about your
gun), arrest you, book you, and humiliate you - EVEN IF YOU HAVE THE
PERMISSION OF THE CHURCH.  Assuming you survive the process, you then have
to hire and pay defense counsel, and only at your trial may you present
your "defense" that you had "permission".  And then you still have to go
back to court to try to get your seized weapon returned and your permit
reinstated.
c) The bill mandates that each church have a policy on firearms.  If a
church wishes to allow, or even encourage, members to carry, it must
maintain a database of who carries, and who has permission to do so, and
must issue statements of permission.  Thus the state is forcing churches to
do additional work and act as _de facto_ police.
d) This bill disproportionately affects those people who live in high crime
neighborhoods, especially those who must walk to services, and may actually
deter people from attending church.

2.The bill  mandates that a no one may carry a firearm (or dangerous
weapon)  into a private residence, again regardless of the wishes of the
owner.  It is not the business of the state to tell a homeowner what he may
do in his own home!  (There isn't even an exclusion for the homeowner!)
a) The same "defense to prosecution" problem exists.
b) This is a gross violation of the privacy of firearms owners.  The
essence of  concealed carry is CONCEALED.  If you have to tell everyone you
know that you're carrying, any benefit of concealment disappears.  If
criminals know you are carrying (especially for women who carry in purses),
you become an excellent target for an ambush.  In addition, since firearms
owners often collect firearms, if criminals know you are carrying, they may
target your house for a burglary.  And remember that YOU may be held liable
for what's done with your stolen firearm!
c) This bill presumes that law abiding gun owners with CCW's are so
dangerous  that they must announce their presence before entering a private
residence.  Not even convicted felons or sex offenders are required to do
this.  Are gun owners lower than child molesters or more dangerous than
convicted rapists and murderers?

3. This bill prohibits firearms (and dangerous weapons) from the premises
of schools.
a) By declaring schools to be off-limits to responsible gun owners, schools
are advertising that they are easy and safe targets for criminals who want
to murder children, or even for student gang-bangers.  For example, in
Pearl, MI, the student who gunned down several of his fellow students was
stopped only by a teacher who kept a firearm in his car.
b) By prohibiting firearms teachers are also identified as easy targets.
This is especially true for female teachers and those teachers who work
with "troubled" youth.  Their jobs are hard enough and there is no reason
to deny them the right to self-defense.
c) Schools are public property, owned by the people, and thus may not
infringe the rights of the public; they do not have private property rights.
d) Private schools are also forced to ban guns which IS a violation of
their private property rights.
e) School is defined vaguely enough that it could conceivably be construed
to include everything from universities to home schools.

THIS BILL MUST BE STOPPED!

Sarah Thompson
To subscribe to the USSC mail list, send a message to:
[e-mail]
In the SUBJECT of the message put:
SUBSCRIBE USSC

- -

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

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 18:26:43 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Charles Hardy)
Subject: [SB57 Contact Info]

I know this has gone out already, but here it is again in case you
want to try to phone, fax, or email any of the Senators on the
Judiciary Committee tonight or first thing Firday (Feb 20) morning
before they discuss SB57.

The hearing is scheduled for 8:00 am, RM 403, and is first on the
agenda.  Let's pack the room.


Contact info below:


Robert C. Steiner  (D)
80 North Wolcott
Salt Lake City, Utah 84103-4477
H-596-1213 O-328-883
[e-mail]

David L. Buhler  (R)
1436 South Yuma Street
Salt Lake City, Utah 84108
H-466-7140 O-355-5009 FAX-355-4008
[e-mail]

Craig L. Taylor (R)  (chair)
312 Oak Lane
Kaysville, Utah 84037
O-544-5909
[e-mail]

Lane Beattie (R)  (sponsor and senate pres)
1313 North 1100 West
West Bountiful, Utah 84087
H-292-7406 O-298-7000
email not listed but [e-mail] may reach him.

Lyle W. Hillyard (R) (Assistant Majority Whip)
175 East First North
Logan, Utah 84321
H-753-0043 O-752-2610
[e-mail]

Mike Dmitrich (D)
HC 65, Box 30
Altamont, Utah 84001-9703
H-454-3494
[e-mail]



- --

Charles C. Hardy        | If my employer has an opinion on
<[e-mail]>            | these things I'm fairly certain
801.588.7200 (work)        | I'm not the one he'd have express it.

"He that violates his oath profanes the Divinity of faith itself." --
 Cicero (found on LA City Hall)

- -

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

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 98 18:50:00 -0700
From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: UofU Parking Spat

This is the second article in the U POLICE REPORT in The Daily Utah
Chronicle, Friday, 13.February 1998 p3:

Feb. 11

Pigeonhole Principle Provokes Parkers' Passion
[headline written by Kevin Bergeson]

- -- As on most mornings in the business parking lot,
several cars were competing for a select few open spots.

Two individuals came across the same open space; one had
been waiting "in line," and the other had stumbled across
it by chance. When the two simultaneously atttempted to
occupy the spot, tempers flared and gestures were exchanged.

After a heated exchange, the one who had been waiting
succeeded in claiming the spot. Feeling threatened by
the encounter, however, he wrote down the other car's
license plate number.

At this time, according to driver #1, the other driver
got out of his car and yelled, "Don't mess with me or
I'll put a bullet in your head."

Driver #1 then found an officer and made a report.

The officer remained by the vehicle, waiting for the
suspect to return. The officer did a quick background
check on the car and its owner, and discovered the
owner had a concealed weapons permit.

When the suspect returned, the officer confronted him
about the alleged verbal assault. The man admitted he
mentioning [sic] a bullet, but couldn't remember the
context.

He was given a misdemeanor citation for making threats.
[end]

The names of the writer, drivers and officer are not given.



- -

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

Date: Fri, 20 Feb 1998 00:55:38 -0700
From: "S. Thompson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: VICTORY ALERT!!  SB 57 is DEAD!

Apologies for this late message.  I just got home from my first evening out
in as long as I can remember. :)  What a GREAT surprise!

You've probably already heard by now, but just in case......

SB 57, Sen. Lane Beattie's draconian gun control bill is now DEAD!  It will
NOT be heard in committee Friday, or any other day this session, and you do
not need to attend the committee meeting.

In addition, the alternate bill discussed in a previous post is no longer
necessary and will not be further pursued.

YOU, all of you, deserve the credit for helping to preserve our gun rights.
 It was YOUR persistence and dedication, YOUR phone calls, faxes, e-mails,
and letters that finally persuaded Sen Beattie to withdraw the bill in the
face of overwhelming public opposition.  Working together, WE were able to
convince our legislators that the law abiding gun owners of Utah will not
allow their rights to be infringed.

No organization, and no lobbyist, can succeed without the support of its
members and friends, and I think I can safely speak for the rest of the
Board when I offer my heartfelt thanks to all of you.

Thanks also to our excellent lobbyist, Rob Bishop and to NRA liaison, Brian
Judy.

More thanks to:
The Utah Gun Rights Association
The Libertarian Party of Utah
Craig Fields and the folks at Gunowners of America for getting an alert out
in record time.
and of course my fellow Board members and Advisory Board members.


While I hate to be a party pooper, I do need to add that HB 343, the Range
Protection Bill, was killed by the House Judiciary Committee, on a 4-4
vote.  I don't yet have a vote report, but will get one to you as soon as I
have the information.

HAVE A VERY HAPPY WEEKEND!!!!

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT!!

Sarah Thompson



To subscribe to the USSC mail list, send a message to:
[e-mail]
In the SUBJECT of the message put:
SUBSCRIBE USSC

- -

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

Date: Fri, 20 Feb 1998 11:34:34 -0700
From: DAVID SAGERS <[e-mail]>
Subject: NRA fires telemarketer -Forwarded

Received: from fs1.mainstream.net by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
    id KAA19833; Thu, 19 Feb 1998 10:09:41 -0700
Received: (from smap@localhost) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id MAA23578; Thu, 19 Feb 1998 12:13:35 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 12:13:35 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1) by fs1.mainstream.net via smap (V1.3)
    id sma023384; Thu Feb 19 12:08:42 1998
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Originator: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk
From: Mikey <[e-mail]>
To: Multiple recipients of list <[e-mail]>
Subject: NRA fires telemarketer
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list

Forwarded by Michael P. Baker
Member, NRA BOD
Micanopy, FL

The following letter from Tanya K. Metaksa is in response to querys
about NRA's position on semi-auto firearms raised by recent erroneous
statements made by a contracted telephone solicitor.

        Tanya K. Metaksa, Executive Director
        NRA Institute for Legislative Action

Dear NRA Member:

Recently, there has been a rumor circulating about NRA-ILA's position
on the Clinton gun and magazine ban.  The rapid and widespread reach of
this erroneous information is clear evidence of the need to confirm,
with a reliable source, any questionable information obtained via the
Internet.  I thank you for taking the time to do just that by contacting
my office.

The basis for this rumor was a conversation between one particular
individual and a representative from a telemarketing firm contracted by
NRA for membership recruitment. Unfortunately, in his zeal to sign up a
new member, the telemarketer made several false statements to this
particular individual regarding our position on the Clinton gun and
magazine ban.  The telemarketing firm in question has been suspended
pending further review of their procedures.  Furthermore, the
telemarketer involved in this incident has been removed from our
account.

Let me assure you that NRA-ILA opposes the Clinton gun and magazine ban
and is committed to its full repeal.  We opposed this ban when it was
first introduced as stand-alone legislation; we opposed it being
attached to the rest of the 1994 Clinton crime bill; and we are still
opposed to the ban now that it is law.

Our efforts to defeat the ban in Congress are well-documented.  During
the summer of 1994, NRA-ILA led the charge against this ill-conceived
legislation.  We left no stone unturned, no option unused in our effort
to kill this bill.  When it became clear that despite our best efforts,
we did not have the votes to block its passage, we orchestrated the
legislative maneuver that stalled its passage for two weeks.
Unfortunately, with the vast resources of the United States Treasury at
his disposal, President Clinton was finally able to persuade enough
lawmakers to drop their opposition to his crime bill and force it
through Congress.

We did not give up, however.  That fall, we poured millions of dollars
into campaigns across the nation to defeat anti-gun politicians and
elect the most pro-gun Congress in decades.  President Clinton himself
"blamed" NRA for his party's decisive defeat in the 1994 elections, and
acknowledged during his State of the Union address in January the
politically devastating impact of his anti-gun policies.

In 1996, on a bi-partisan vote, the House of Representatives passed
overwhelmingly a full repeal of the Clinton gun and magazine ban.
Passage of this repeal was achieved only after months of hard work by
NRA-ILA to bring this legislation to the floor.  Unfortunately, the
Senate took no action on the repeal.

While we relentlessly exploited every legislative remedy at our
disposal, we simultaneously pursued this matter in the courts.  In 1995,
NRA filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
Michigan challenging the law.  When that suit was dismissed, NRA
appealed to the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court.  Last November, that court
reinstated the challenge to the federal gun ban, and as I write to you
today, the staff of NRA's Office of General Counsel is busy preparing
their arguments in this case.

Clearly, an organization that supported the Clinton gun and magazine
ban would never go to such lengths to abolish it.  In fact, NRA has
invested more money and time in the effort to scrap the Clinton gun and
magazine ban than any other organization in the United States.  And I
would remind you that our battle against gun bans is by no means limited
to the Federal level.  Right now, in California, NRA is fighting a
semi-automatic ban that threatens to put law-abiding gun owners like you
and me in jail.

I hope this information puts to rest any concerns you may have had
about this matter.  Please do not hesitate to contact us again if you
ever have any questions about this or any other NRA-ILA policy.

            Sincerely,

            Tanya K. Metaksa, Executive Director
            NRA Institute for Legislative Action


I hope that this helps to put this issue to rest, so that we can all get
back to focusing on our primary concerns--defending the Second
Amendment.

Sincerely,

Anthony Roulette
- -------------------------------------
NRA-ILA Grassroots Division

E-mail: [e-mail]

National Rifle Association
Institute for Legislative Action
11250 Waples Mill Road
Fairfax, Virginia  22030
[phone]
http://www.nra.org
- -------------------------------------


- -

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

End of utah-firearms-digest V2 #25
**********************************