ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/utah-firearms/archive/v02.n034

Internet Message Format | 1998-03-15 | 47KB

From: [e-mail] (utah-firearms-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: utah-firearms-digest V2 #34
Reply-To: utah-firearms-digest
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


utah-firearms-digest      Monday, March 16 1998      Volume 02 : Number 034




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

Date: Mon, 09 Mar 1998 14:48:02 -0700
From: DAVID SAGERS <[e-mail]>
Subject: Sender: [e-mail]

Received: (from smap@localhost) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id CAA00279; Sun, 8 Mar 1998 02:29:14 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 8 Mar 1998 02:29:14 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1) by fs1.mainstream.net via smap (V1.3)
    id sma029438; Sun Mar  8 02:26:48 1998
Message-Id: <v01510100b1278381270d@[209.20.138.224]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Originator: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk
From: [e-mail] (Dave Workman)
To: Multiple recipients of list <[e-mail]>
Subject:
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list

Hey, everybody:

        Want to read a scathing whack on gun control myths by three pretty
sharp pro-gun legal minds?

        It's long, and it's time consuming, and it would take the average
Hewlett Packard printer a long time to run it out... but here it is!

http://www.2ndlawlib.org/journals/tennmed.html




- -

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

Date: Mon, 09 Mar 1998 15:08:34 -0700
From: DAVID SAGERS <[e-mail]>
Subject: CS: Pol-Armed men on the streets of London -Forwarded

Received: (from smap@localhost) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id PAA17721; Mon, 9 Mar 1998 15:37:57 -0500 (EST)
Date: Mon, 9 Mar 1998 15:37:57 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1) by fs1.mainstream.net via smap (V1.3)
    id sma017610; Mon Mar  9 15:37:14 1998
Message-Id: <v03110703b129e5f75e81@[204.182.72.70]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Originator: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk
From: "E.J. Totty" <[e-mail]>
To: Multiple recipients of list <[e-mail]>
Subject: CS: Pol-Armed men on the streets of London
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list

    To all,

    A British perspecitive - a good read.
ET
- ------------------------------------------

>Date: Mon, 9 Mar 1998 09:30:43 -0500
>From: Steven Kendrick/UK <[e-mail]>
>Subject: CS: Pol-Armed men on the streets of London
>To: CyberShooters <[e-mail]>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Sender: [e-mail]
>Precedence: bulk
>
>From: Sean Gabb <[e-mail]>
>
>Free Life Commentary
>Editor:  Sean Gabb
>Issue Number Fourteen
>Monday, 9 March 1998, 1:20am
>
>==========================
>"Over himself, over his own mind and body,
>the individual is sovereign"
>(J.S. Mill, On Liberty, 1859)
>==========================
>
>           Armed Men on the Streets of London
>                      by Sean Gabb
>
>Earlier this evening - or yesterday evening, to be precise - I went with
>my wife to see Titanic.  It was an impressive though much overrated
>film, not nearly so good as the older A Night to Remember, which in a
>number of scenes it appeared to copy.  I disliked it for the
>melodramatic tear-jerking that interfered with the much larger story,
>and for the implied attack on England - all that wailing Irish music and
>the suppressed glee at showing how a shining glory of the Liverpool
>shipyards went to the bottom.
>
>Even so, it contained an interesting portrayal of the Old Order as it
>existed just before the Great War.  There was much that was harsh in
>that Order - the rigid separation of classes, for a start, and the
>emptiness of many of the lives at the top.  But it was the choice fruits
>of the most wonderful and stable expansion of the productive forces that
>has ever happened.  The people who sailed on the Titanic in April 1914,
>and who went down with her, were - regardless of their social station,
>and regardless of how many of them met their fate - free citizens of
>free countries.  There were no passports to be carried and presented on
>demand, no intrusive body searches for prohibited vegetable substances,
>and no questions asked if passengers chose to carry firearms across
>national frontiers.
>
>We were invited to feel sorry for the thousand or so people who went
>down with the Titanic.  For myself, I would rather have died then than
>have lived to witness the avalanche of our free civilisation that began
>two years and two months later at Sarajevo, and that may before its
>centenary have carried away all the familiar landmarks of the England
>and America that existed in 1912.
>
>That was the message I carried away with me as Mrs Gabb and I stepped
>out into Leicester Square and walked down to where we had parked on the
>Embankment.  Any tears I might have been inclined to shed for Leonardo
>di Caprio and Kate Winslett were entirely obscured by thoughts of that
>far more awesome catastrophe.  And I was more sensitised than usual for
>what happened next.
>
>At 11:45 pm, as we came to the junction of Charing Cross Road and
>Trafalgar Square - between the National Portrait Gallery and St Martin's
>Church - we noticed a Police car stopped behind another car.  A black
>man had been stopped for something.  It hardly matters what - black
>drivers are often stopped at night on the streets of London:  sometimes
>for real crimes, sometimes for suspected infractions of laws that ought
>not to exist, sometimes simply because they are black.  There was
>nothing unusual in this scene until we were walking past.  Then I
>noticed that one of the Police officers was carrying a gun.  It was
>buttoned into a holster on his hip.  He was not using it for any
>purpose.  He just happened to have a firearm.  Had I stayed to look
>more, I might have seen that the other officers were also armed.
>
>I was shocked.  Ever since the Trafalgar Square riot of 1886, the Police
>in this country have been unarmed.  Certainly, guns are available for
>special purposes; and there are occasionally armed officers in places
>where Irish terrorist outrages are expected.  But I had never before
>seen an armed officer involved in a casual stop and search of a driver.
>There was plainly no call for the gun to be brandished - as I said, it
>was buttoned safely away in its holster.
>
>I wanted to stop and make a note of the Police car's registration
>number, but was unable.  Though she said nothing, there was something
>about Mrs Gabb's manner that told me:  "Keep moving.  Don't get
>involved.  This is nothing to do with you".  Since she grew up in a
>Communist police state, she knows exactly how to walk past on the other
>side when the authorities choose to be nasty to strangers.  And she was
>probably right to keep in practice earlier this evening.  Her love
>affair with England began five years ago with encomiums to British
>freedom, but has now matured into an escape into its history before 1914
>and a growing interest in the United States - a country which is cursed
>with a militarised bureaucracy and a legal profession that has perverted
>the plain English of the Constitution into something that none of its
>drafters would have recognised, but which is still somewhat behind us in
>its progress to being a satrapy of the New World Order.
>
>Of course, American Police officers are armed as a matter of routine,
>and my American readers may wonder what it is that has launched me on
>these melancholy reflections.  The answer is that the British public has
>just been comprehensively disarmed.  Any ordinary British citizen who is
>caught with so much as a Beretta .22 faces unlimited fines or up to ten
>years imprisonment, or both.  There are calls in the media for even
>tighter controls than now on rifles and shotguns.  And there is actually
>a Bill before Parliament to bring in a licensing scheme for airguns.
>
>We are the most comprehensively disarmed people in the "free" world.
>Even the Red Chinese are better trusted by their rulers with guns than
>we now are.  And Mrs Gabb regarded it as normal at her school in
>Czechoslovakia to be taken out of her lessons every now and again for
>some target practice with live ammunition.
>
>But our rulers have given up not a single gun of their own.  The Prime
>Minister remains so terrified of the people who elected him that he
>dares not visit his Constituency without 28 armed guards to protect him.
>The Police have taken to openly flaunting their firepower.
>
>The authorities keep their guns for two reasons.  The first is the
>obvious one.  The hundreds of thousands of guns that have been handed in
>during the past few months had been almost entirely in the hands of law-
>abiding people.  The number of licensed guns used for criminal purposes
>in this country has always been minuscule.  Even the Hungerford and
>Dunblane massacres hardly raise the figures to statistical significance.
>But the guns that are the proper object of concern - those in criminal
>hands - have not been handed in.  The number of armed crimes in this
>country has been rising smoothly since the 1960s.  The progressive
>tightening of gun control since 1968 has done nothing to moderate this
>trend.  Indeed, by disarming the prospective victims of crime, gun
>control has contributed to the trend.
>
>The two Firearms Acts that followed Dunblane gave immense pleasure to
>creeps like Anne "Yes I do [want to live in a slave state]" Pearston and
>to all the special interests that used her as a battering ram against
>our liberties, but did nothing at all to make the streets any safer.
>Therefore the continued need for having armed Policemen on the streets.
>
>The other reason is less obvious.  It is probably not even fully
>understood by the authorities.  But it seems to be that the
>proliferation of casually armed Police officers in the past few years is
>partly to tell us who are the masters and who are the slaves.  They have
>the power, and we must obey.  For the most part, naked force - or even
>its overt threat - is unnecessary.  We have long since been broken in to
>the new order of things.  Guns are displayed merely as a symbol - rather
>as top hats were worn on the first class decks of the Titanic not so
>much to protect the wearers from the wind and rain as to distinguish
>them from the other passengers.
>
>Why do I stay in this decadent police state that England has become?
>Why not give in to my wife's prompting that a good teaching job is just
>waiting for me across the Atlantic, in a country where we can keep more
>of what we earn and live in a decent house and still have the freedom -
>even if diminishing - to keep and bear arms?
>
>The answer is written on the pediment of the statue of Nurse Edith
>Cavell that overlooked that armed incident in London a few hours ago:
>"Patriotism is Not Enough".  I may go to America for holidays.  I may go
>there to earn a little money.  But I have a duty to the country that I
>still passionately love to keep my home here and to return to it and do
>what little I can to make it England again.
>
>==========================
>Free Life Commentary is an independent journal of comment, published on
>the Internet.  To receive regular issues, send
>e-mail to Sean Gabb at [e-mail]
>
>Issues are archived at
>
>        <http://freespace.virgin.net/old.whig/>
>
>Contact Address:        25 Chapter Chambers,
>                        Esterbrooke Street,
>                        London, SW1P 4NN;
>                        Telephone:  [phone]
>
>If you like Free Life Commentary, you may also care to subscribe to my
>longer, hard copy journal, Free Life, subscription details for which can
>be obtained by writing to me at the above address.
>
>==========================
>Legal Notice:  Though using the name Free Life, this journal is owned by
>me and not by the Libertarian Alliance, which in consequence bears no
>liability of whatever kind for the contents.
>--
>Sean Gabb                               | "Over himself, over his own  |
>E-mail:  [e-mail]            | mind and body, the individual|
><http://freespace.virgin.net/old.whig/> | is sovereign"                |
>Mobile Number: 0956 472199              | J.S. Mill, On Liberty, 1859  |
>
>  ++++
>  We can't all sue the Government. But we can give money to
>  people who are making the attempt:
>
>  David Steed Fighting Fund, c/o Howell-Jones & Partners, 75
>  Surbiton Road, Kingston-upon-Thames.
>
>  NPA Fighting Fund, c/o BM NPA, London, WC1N 3XX.
>
>  Justice for Shooters, PO Box 705, Bourne End, Bucks, SL8 5FS.
>
>  "A pound a day keeps the gun-grabbers away"
>  ++++
>
>  To subscribe (or unsubscribe), send email to
>  [e-mail] with no subject and the text:
>
>  subscribe cybershooters (or unsubscribe cybershooters)
>
>  as the first and only line in the message body.  For further
>  information, please refer to the Cybershooters FAQ at
>  http://www.tsra.demon.co.uk/csfaq.htm
>




- -

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

Date: Mon, 09 Mar 1998 15:54:44 -0700
From: DAVID SAGERS <[e-mail]>
Subject: GSL> Don't Buy Ruger -Forwarded

Received: (qmail 27200 invoked by uid 516); 9 Mar 1998 22:36:35 -0000
Delivered-To: [e-mail]
Received: (qmail 27068 invoked from network); 9 Mar 1998 22:36:14 -0000
Received: from smtp3.erols.com (207.172.3.236)
  by majordomo.pobox.com with SMTP; 9 Mar 1998 22:36:13 -0000
Received: from omniscience ([141.161.144.30])
    by smtp3.erols.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) with SMTP id RAA08058
    for <[e-mail]>; Mon, 9 Mar 1998 17:36:12 -0500 (EST)
From: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 09 Mar 1998 17:36:26 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: rec.guns,talk.politics.guns
CC: GSL <[e-mail]>
Subject: GSL> Don't Buy Ruger
References: <6df15p$[e-mail]> <6dg8tk$[e-mail]> <6djp2f$[e-mail]> <6dmcof$[e-mail]> <6do3n5$[e-mail]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: [e-mail]

- ----------------------------------------- http://GunsSaveLives.com
(Opinions here are personal and not those of any organization.)

Several people responded to a rec.guns post where I suggested Ruger was
not a prudent choice in a firearm.  Some asked for substantiation. I
remember hearing the information in '89-'90 when it was happening.

Chris Knox was good enough to send along this article, which details how
Ruger pushed for magazine limits.  This started the ball rolling
seriously toward the current 10-round limit we now enjoy so much.

Why anybody who wants a gun would buy from Bill Ruger is beyond me.

Read for yourself. Evaluate objectively.

Date: Mon, 9 Mar 1998 15:15:48 -0700 (MST)
From: Chris Knox <[e-mail]>
To:   [e-mail]


Larry Cipriani saved the original.  This is from the days that a guy
unknown to me was transcribing the Hard Corps Report to t.p.g and
rec.guns.  I don't know that it is bit-for-bit identical, however it is
substantially accurate.

cwk


From: [e-mail] (Larry Cipriani)
Subject: Re: Did Ruger actually support 10 rnd limit?
Organization: Idaho City University
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 20:06:23 GMT
Lines: 82

This was written by Neal Knox.  It appeared in the 12/1/89 issue of
The New Gun Week.


          Knox Replies To Comment From Ruger Counsel's
               Gun Week, December 1, 1989

The following reply to Stephen Sanetti's letter from Neal Knox of the
Firearms Coalition was received by FAX.

"Steve Sanetti says 'I know better' than to ascribe Bill Ruger's
magazine
ban proposal to business considerations. Maybe so; I don't think Bill
is by any means 'anti-gun,' nor do I think he really _wants_ a ban on
either guns or magazines (after all, he got his start as a machine gun
designer). But I do think Bill Ruger is pushing a plan that would
protect
his business while affecting only his competitors, and I think he's
damaging the efforts of those of us attempting to stop all proposed
bans.
Further, I don't think his actions on this issue, and other issues in
the past, allows him to be described as 'the strongest supporter of our
Constitutional right to keep and bear arms.'

"What I _know_ is that about 9 p.m. the night before Bill sent a letter
to certain members of Congress calling for a ban on high-capacity
magazines he called me, wanting me to push such a ban. His opening
words,
after citing the many federal, state and local bills to ban detachable
magazine semi-autos, were 'I want to save our little gun' -- which he
later defined as the Mini-14 and the Mini-30. I'm not ascribing Bill's
motives as 'expedient from a business standpoint;' Bill did.

"While I agree that a ban on over-15 magazines would be 'indefinitely
[sic]
preferable' to a ban on the guns that use them, that's not the question.
Neither I, nor the other gun groups have ever believed that we were
faced
with such an either/or choice. Early last year the NRA legislative
Policy committee discussed various alternatives to the proposed 'assault
weapons' ban, and wisely decided that magazine restrictions wouldn't
satisfy our foes, but would make it more difficult to stop a gun ban.

"I was particularly shocked when I realized Bill was talking about a
ban on possession of over-15-round magazines, rather than a ban on
sales (which is bad enough). I told him that such a law would make me
a felon, for not only did I have standard over-15 magazines for my Glock
pistol (a high-capacity which has sharply cut into Ruger's police
business), I have many high-cap mags for guns I don't even own, and
don't
even know where they all are. As I told Bill, after a lifetime of
accumulating miscellaneous gun parts and accessories, there's no way I
could clean out all my old parts drawers and boxes, then swear --
subject
to a five or ten-year Federal prison term -- that I absolutely didn't
have a M3 grease gun mag or 30-round M-2 magazine lying in some
forgotten
drawer.

"Bill said (and all these direct quotes are approximate), 'No, there'd
be amnesty for people like you. We have to propose a ban on possession
before they could take us seriously.' He contended that the public's
problem was with 'firepower,' which could be resolved by eliminating
high capacity mags.

"I told him Metzenbaum and Co. would gladly use whatever he offered,
but they weren't about to willingly agree to eliminate high-cap
magazines as a substitute for banning guns; that their intention isn't
to eliminate 'firepower' but 'firearms.'

"Bill finally said, 'Neal, you're being very negative about it.' He
got angry, then said 'Well somebody's got to do it; by God I will.'
And the next day he sent his letter to the Hill; the evidence indicates
a few weeks later he talked SAAMI into supporting undefined 'regulation'
of magazines over-15-rounds -- a vote that might have gone a little
differently if any produced high-capacity magazines as standard for
either rifles or pistols.

"I suspect that Ruger and SAAMI's actions are responsible, directly or
indirectly, for the Bush Administration's proposal to ban high-cap
mags, but that proposal has been ignored -- except as evidence that 'the
Bush Administration and the American firearms industry recognize there's
a problem -- that Americans shouldn't be allowed to have such guns.'

"Of course, that isn't what Bill Ruger and SAAMI are saying, but that's
the message they're sending. Perhaps it isn't business expediency to
propose banning only that which they don't make, in an effort to protect
what they do make; but it sure can't be claimed to be in defense of the
Second Amendment."
- --
Larry Cipriani, [e-mail]


- --------------------------
GunsSaveLives Internet Discussion List

This list is governed by an acceptable use
policy: http://www.wizard.net/~kc/policy.html
or available upon request.

To unsubscribe send a message to
[e-mail]

with the following line in the body:

unsubscribe gsl

GUNSSAVELIVES (GSL) IS A PRIVATE UNMODERATED LIST.
THE OWNER TAKES NO RESPONSIBILTY FOR CONTENT. ALL
RIGHTS RESERVED.


- -

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

Date: Mon, 09 Mar 1998 16:20:12 -0700
From: "S. Thompson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Media Attacks on Richard Mack Have Begun -Forwarded

At 02:14 PM 3/9/98 -0700, you wrote:
>PROVO  -- Richard Mack already has put his name on a piece of
>American history  -- a 1997 Supreme Court verdict that overturned a key
>provision of a gun-control bill.

    <snip>

> If he becomes sheriff in Utah County, Mack said he would request a
>budget increase  -- and even a tax hike  -- for only one thing: to increase
>the pay of his deputies.
>
> ``It comes down to, do you want to have a responsible
>law-enforcement department or don't you?'' he said. ``If you don't, the
>same old problems are going to continue.''


    Mack is definitely one of my heroes for what he did for our gun rights.
But I'd have a great deal of difficulty voting (not that I CAN vote in Utah
Co. <g>) for someone whose only public platform is raising taxes!

    Does anyone know what his OTHER platforms are?  Is he willing to insist -
as other sheriffs have done - that all Federal law enforcement officials
get his permission and cooperation to work in Utah county?  What are his
priorities in law enforcement?  Crime?  Drugs?  Asset forfeiture?  How does
he feel about Utah's firearms laws?

    Inquiring minds - and voters - would like to know!

Sarah

- -

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

Date: Mon, 09 Mar 1998 16:26:08 -0700
From: "S. Thompson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: GSL> Don't Buy Ruger -Forwarded

At 03:54 PM 3/9/98 -0700, you wrote:
>----------------------------------------- http://GunsSaveLives.com
>(Opinions here are personal and not those of any organization.)
>
>Several people responded to a rec.guns post where I suggested Ruger was
>not a prudent choice in a firearm.  Some asked for substantiation. I
>remember hearing the information in '89-'90 when it was happening.
>
>Chris Knox was good enough to send along this article, which details how
>Ruger pushed for magazine limits.  This started the ball rolling
>seriously toward the current 10-round limit we now enjoy so much.
>
>Why anybody who wants a gun would buy from Bill Ruger is beyond me.
>
>Read for yourself. Evaluate objectively.


Why anyone would buy a gun from Ruger, Smith & Wesson, Colt, NAA, Glock or
any of the other traitorous companies who voluntarily agreed to FORCE us to
buy useless trigger locks is beyond ME.

I won't buy a NEW gun from ANY of these companies.  PERIOD.  I'll buy used
- - or not at all.  (Or maybe from the few who refused.  The only one I know
of off-hand is Casull.)

Sarah

- -

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

Date: Mon, 09 Mar 1998 18:08:24 -0700
From: "S. Thompson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: USSC Delegate training

    ***PLEASE CROSS POST IN UTAH ONLY!!***

USSC is sponsoring a "delegate training" session to:

Provide a legislative update
Provide members and others the "how-to's" to strengthen our firearm freedoms
Learn how to get PRO firearms folks on the ballot
Learn how to become a delegate - or a champion supporter of the delegate of
choice
Highlight steps to successfully defend our firearm freedoms by getting and
keeping the GOOD GUYS IN - and the WRONG GUYS OUT!

WHEN?  Saturday March 14, 11 AM to 1 PM
WHERE?  Whitmore Library, 2197 East 7000 South, SLC
NEED MORE INFO?  Call Shirley Spain, 801-963-0784 or [e-mail]

This short, two-hour session will BEGIN PROMPTLY!
Come out and join USSC's Chairman Woody Powell, NRA-ILA regional director
Brian Judy, and former legislator and lobbyist Lloyd Selleneit who will
share their expertise.

Handouts and a FREE delegate training video will be provided to members
unable to attend.  Contact Shirley (see above) for more info on this, if
you're unable to attend.

PARTY CAUCUSES are MARCH 24!!  This is an ELECTION YEAR!

NOW is the time to ACT if you don't want to see more GUN CONTROL
legislation next year.
NOW is the time to ACT if you're worried about what the Olympics will do to
our firearms laws.
NOW is the time to ACT if you're worried about S. 10 and other Federal Gun
Control.

If you'd like to have MORE SAY in Utah politics, USSC will give you the tools!

Sarah Thompson
for USSC

PS:  DO NOT contact ME about delegate training.  Shirley Spain is
coordinating the event.  I will be out of town, and likely won't even
receive your message until it's too late.  Thanks!


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

- -

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

Date: Thu, 12 Mar 1998 08:14:39 -0700
From: DAVID SAGERS <[e-mail]>
Subject: Candidates Needed for UT State Legislature -Forwarded

I'm trying to help recruit good conservative/libertarian candidates for =
the following state legislative districts.  Any leads?

House District #2 (Box Elder County, including Brigham City, Perry, =
Willard, Mantua, Corinne, and Honeyville).  Rep Peter Knudson is =
supposedly leaving the House in order to run for the Senate seat being =
opened by Sen Holmgren's retirement.
House District #19 (Davis County, including Bountiful as far south as =
1800 South).  I expect that Rep Sheryl Allen is running for re-election, =
but she is arguably the most socialistic, teachers' union-oriented =
Republican in the whole legislature, and she is a leader of the = so-called
"GOP Mainstream Caucus."  She needs strong opposition within = the
party.
House District #36 (SL County, approx 2000 East and farther east and =
between 3000 and 5000 South).  I haven't heard that Rep Lamont Tyler is
= retiring, but he scored 15% on the 1997 GR report card, tied for the =
worst Republican.  He needs strong opposition within the party.
House District #47 (SL County, West Jordan approx between 7400 and
9000 =
South and between 700 East and 4000 West).  I haven't heard that Rep =
Bryan Holladay is retiring, but he scored 20% on the 1997 GR report =
card, and needs strong opposition within the party.
House District #50 (SL County, South Jordan approx between 9000 and
=
12000 South and between 700 East and State Hwy 111).  I've heard that
=
Rep Lloyd Frandsen may retire.  Even if he doesn't retire on his own, he
= scored only 15% on the 1997 GR report card, and needs strong
opposition = within the party.
House District #54 (Duchesne and Wasatch Counties).  Rep Beverly
Evans = is supposedly running for the Senate seat that is opening up as
a result = of the retirement of Sen Alarik Myrin.
House District #63 (Utah County, Provo, north of 300 North and east of =
University Avenue).  I haven't heard that Rep Jordan Tanner is retiring, =
but he scored 22% on the 1997 GR report card, and needs strong =
opposition within the party.
House District #71 (San Juan and Grand Counties, part of Emery
County).
Supposedly, Rep Keele Johnson is retiring.

Senate District #24 (Box Elder County, small part of west Cache County).
=
 Sen John Holmgren is retiring.  Rep Peter Knudson is supposedly going =
to try to fill this seat.  With a 1997 GR rating of 21%, and with =
sponsorship of HB137 (Children's Health Insurance Program) on his
record = for 1998, the Republican Party should be able to do better.
Senate District #26 (Daggett, Uintah, Duchesne and Wasatch Counties,
and = parts of Carbon and Summit Counties including Park City).  Sen
Alarik =
Myrin is retiring, and Rep Beverly Evans is supposedly trying to fill = this
seat.  With a 1997 GR rating of 30%, the Republican Party should be =
able to do better.

Also we would like to see Republicans file for every seat now held by a
=
Democrat.  In some cases it may be hopeless because of the Democratic
= orientation of the district, but maybe even a candidate that sits at =
home and does nothing could convince the Democrats (and their UEA =
friends) to spend some of their money there.  One suggestion is that =
each GOP leg chair in these Demo districts should file if he has failed = to
recruit someone else.
There's my summary for now.  I may be able to provide more info on =
retirements soon.  Thank you for any help in finding good, principled =
candidates for the legislature.
Sincerely,
Steve



- -

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

Date: Thu, 12 Mar 1998 08:24:23 -0700
From: DAVID SAGERS <[e-mail]>
Subject: Rep. Ron Paul to speak

http://www.ut-ra.org/98_state_rally.htm

Utah Republican Assembly

INVITES YOU TO A STATEWIDE RALLY CELEBRATING THE RETURN TO
CONSERVATIVE PRINCIPLES AND ACCOUNTABILITY IN UTAH POLITICS

Let The "Party" Begin!

Keynote Speaker

The distinguished Republican Congressman from Texas

The Honorable

Ron Paul

<Picture>

"We have not seen Ron Paul#s like in Washington since the days of the
Founding Fathers. He is the 20th Century#s Thomas Jefferson"
Lew Rockwell -Von Mises Institute

Featuring a special musical presentation by the award winning

"Rising Generation"

DATE: Friday, March 20, 1998 TIME: 7:00pm PLACE: UVSC Ballroom*

Hear about the incredible growth of nationwide Republican Assemblies

Learn how the Republican Assembly efforts are returning principles and
accountability to government

Discover that conservatism is the mainstream in American philosophy

Discover how you or your organization can have a greater influence on
government than you ever thought possible


Directions:

*University Parkway exit in Orem, drive East to stoplight. Turn left into
campus, then right onto College Drive. Follow signs to Student Center
and Parking.

For Information Call: Lori Roberts 771-0877 (Layton) or Vona Hunsaker
373-2743 (Provo) or Ruth Robinson 254-6932 (Salt Lake City)
Admission is free


- -

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

Date: Thu, 12 Mar 1998 08:41:33 -0700
From: DAVID SAGERS <[e-mail]>
Subject: Volunteer to take photographs

If you are interested in attending a reception-fund raiser for Rep. Ron
Paul, and can take good indoor pictures, I am looking for a volunteer to
take photographs, March 20 at 5:45pm.  If you are interested please
contact me at:
[e-mail]
or leave a message at 339-1499

Requirements: A good 35mm camera and ability to take good indoor
pictures.


- -

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

Date: Fri, 13 Mar 1998 08:21:22 -0700
From: DAVID SAGERS <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: H.R. 424 -Forwarded

Received: (from smap@localhost) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id UAA24623; Thu, 12 Mar 1998 20:11:40 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 1998 20:11:40 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1) by fs1.mainstream.net via smap (V1.3)
    id sma024491; Thu Mar 12 20:09:37 1998
Message-Id: <v01530501b12dbe493154@[206.163.4.149]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Originator: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk
From: [e-mail] (Doug Spittler)
To: Multiple recipients of list <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: H.R. 424
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list

Yup. Those Republicans are on _ our _ side, alright! By the way, I've yet
to receive any explanation as to just why an assault with a gun is so much
worse than the same crime carried out with a knife, ball bat, ball peen
hammer, etc. Anybody got any suggestions?
- ---------------------------
    The House recently voted to apply mandatory minimum
>sentences for certain gun crimes.  (The February 24 vote was 350
>- 59 in favor of H.R. 424.)  As stated in an earlier alert, there
>are serious problems with this bill.  First and foremost, there
>are too many "Bernie Goetz's" who already get prosecuted for
>using a gun in self-defense.  Now H.R. 424 gives federal
>prosecutors a powerful weapon that can send gun owners to jail
>from 15 to 35 years.
>
>     While Democrats were split on this vote, only four
>Republicans stood-up for gun rights and voted against the bill:
>Reps. Ron Paul (TX), Joe Scarborough (FL), Linda Smith (WA) and
>J.C. Watts (OK).  Three other Republicans did not vote:  Reps.
>Benjamin Gilman (NY), Steve Schiff (NM) and Don Young (AK).
>Every other Republican voted for the bill.
>
>     Pro-gun Democrat, Rep. Virgil Goode (VA), told GOA right
>after the vote that the leadership appeared to be "leaning" on
>the Republican members.  Goode noted that some Republican members
>even switched their votes to the "Yes" side during the actual
>vote after being "talked to" by other Members on the House floor.
>[Incidentally, Rep. Goode voted against H.R. 424 for the right
>reasons.]
>
>     Unfortunately, there was a lot of confusion on this vote.
>Many of the staffers that handled your calls on this issue were
>unfamiliar with the federal code which is being amended by H.R.
>424.  (We know because we have talked with these same staffers,
>too!)  H.R. 424 will increase the prison sentence for using a gun
>during the commission of -- what the federal code defines to be
>-- a "crime of violence."  While the layman might think that a
>"crime of violence" just refers to those bad guys who rape,
>murder and break into others homes, most people fail to realize
>this definition can cover a much broader array of persons.
>
>     The federal code defines a "crime of violence" as a federal
>felony which "has as an element the use, attempted use, or
>threatened use of physical force against the person or property
>of another."  Two observations can be made at this point.  First,
>prosecutors who harbor a narrow view of self-defense can use this
>language to prosecute gun owners within federal jurisdiction for
>using guns in self-defense.  (Remember, what is self-defense to
>you can be considered a "crime of violence" by an anti-gun
>prosecutor.  And under H.R. 424, this could mean anywhere from
>15-35 years in jail.)  Second, the definition of "crime of
>violence" can even include a joking or not so serious threat to
>damage someone else's property.
>
>     Hence, assume that while you are on vacation in a federal
>park, a drunk driver rams into the back of your car, seriously
>injuring your four-year-old daughter.  You get out of the car and
>threaten to shoot the drunk driver's [expletive deleted] tires
>out with an unloaded firearm which you are lawfully carrying in
>the glove compartment of your car.  You never make any effort to
>retrieve the firearm or open the compartment.  Under this
>scenario, the drunk driver could well get away with a suspended
>sentence.  But you WILL be sent to prison for a MANDATORY minimum
>prison sentence of TEN YEARS under H.R. 424.  This bill punishes
>with long mandatory prison sentences anyone who merely POSSESSES
>a firearm in connection with what is broadly defined as a federal
>"crime of violence."  As mentioned above, such a "crime" can
>include a simple threat to damage property, whether the threat is
>serious, non-serious, or even joking.  The firearm does not have
>to be anywhere in the vicinity of the "crime."

**************************************************
* If you think you have the answer, you probably *
* didn't understand the question!                *
**************************************************




- -

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

Date: Fri, 13 Mar 98 07:48:00 -0700
From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: Hidden anti-gun agenda?

- ---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 1998 00:47:06 EST
From: FreeUtah <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

This Tribune story is interesting because the plaintiff's attorney, Russ
Fericks, organized the annual Fordham debate at the UofU College of Law
a few years ago. The panel was rigged pro gun control until I lobbied
to add gun control opponent David Kopel to the panel. Don Kates was
also on the panel, but I didn't know he was an active gun control
opponent until the panel.

Scooter!

Smith & Wesson Not Liable in Shooting

BY SHEILA R. McCANN THE SALT LAKE TRIBUNE
Tanya Copier's ex-husband shot and paralyzed her with a .38 caliber
handgun. He went to prison and she sued Smith & Wesson, arguing the
manufacturing of handguns is ultrahazardous and the company should
be liable for injuries. The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected
her lawsuit in a decision released Wednesday, finding Utah law does
not support her theory. ``Ms. Copier was harmed not by the manufacturing
of the Smith & Wesson .38, but by the use of it to shoot her,'' wrote
senior appeals Judge William J. Holloway. ``This distinction is
significant because Ms. Copier's argument essentially collapses all
uses of guns into one purpose, which she contends is to injure or kill
people,'' Holloway continued. ``However, Ms. Copier ignores a number
of legitimate uses, including self-defense, home protection, and use
by law enforcement officers.'' Copier, then 44, died of her injuries
three months after she filed her lawsuit in 1995. Her daughter, Bree
Renee Lindsey, added a wrongful death claim and continued the litigation
on her behalf. Her attorney, Russell C. Fericks, said no decision had
been made about pursuing a further appeal.


- -

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

Date: Mon, 16 Mar 1998 12:26:03 -0700
From: DAVID SAGERS <[e-mail]>
Subject: Denver -Forwarded

Received: from fs1.mainstream.net by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
    id RAA10137; Sun, 15 Mar 1998 17:13:28 -0700
Received: (from smap@localhost) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id TAA29304; Sun, 15 Mar 1998 19:20:22 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 1998 19:20:22 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1) by fs1.mainstream.net via smap (V1.3)
    id sma029270; Sun Mar 15 19:18:06 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: Denver
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list

>Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
>To: Multiple recipients of list PRN <[e-mail]>
>Reply-To: [e-mail]
>Errors-To: [e-mail]
>Sender: [e-mail]
>From: [e-mail] (Ric Duncan)
>Date: Tue, 10 Mar 1998 23:13:00 -0500
>Organization: AirPower Information Services [phone]
>Subject: Denver
>
>=01EID:214A FC6AB9A0
>
>http://cssa-co.org/fcc/news/outfitter_warn.html
>
>What Every Outfitter Should Know About Denver
>
>By Ron Phillips 02-18-98
>
>The City of Denver is the most dangerous place in the western states
>for the hunter who is unaware of what is poised for attack. It is not
>the criminals, but the city government that your clients need to fear.
>Under Denver Municipal Ordinance 37-50, et. seq., the City may seize
>your home, car or other property as a public nuisance if it has been
>used to "commit, conduct, promote, facilitate or aid in the commission
>of or flight from" any of several listed offenses.
>
>Possession of a firearm in a vehicle is a crime. There are no
>exceptions such as hunting, travel, or going to a range. To quote the
>ordinance it is a crime to "Unlawfully discharge, possession, carrying
>flourishing, concealment, use, storage, or sale of firearms, knives,
>and/or assault weapons, dangerous weapons, or defaced firearms=85." The
>Denver City Attorney's office has said they will confiscate cars and
>guns in all instances.
>
>Clients should be warned to be very prudent if they have to pass
>through Denver. Do not speed, stop at bars, eat at restaurants, or
>stay at hotels. If asked by an officer if he can look in the vehicle
>or if there are firearms in it, just politely reply that without
>advice of council, you are unable to answer any questions.
>
>There is an effort in the state legislature to fix the problem of
>municipalities going crazy with anti-gun regulations. There is a bill
>in this session of the General Assembly, House Bill-1260, that will
>prevent cities from enacting laws that are a greater restriction than
>state law. The bill needs your support, so call our legislators. Also,
>thanks should go to sponsor Rep. Mike Salaz.
>
>***********************************************************************
>Also:
>
>http://cssa-co.org/fcc/news/kmondrord.html
>
>Ordinance Lets City Take Your Property
>
>By Kevin C. Massaro
>Published in the Denver Post, Sunday, February 22, 1998, J1
>
>Worried about losing your property to theft in Denver? Since January
>17, 1997, the City of Denver has the power to take your home and car
>and unlike the criminals, it=92s perfectly legal.
>
>Under Denver Municipal Ordinance 37-50, et. seq., the City may seize
>your home, car or other property as a public nuisance if it has been
>used to =93commit, conduct, promote, facilitate or aid in the commission
>of or flight from=94 any of several listed offenses.
>
>What does Denver consider public nuisance offenses? Among other
>things, this ordinance is triggered by two disturbing the peace
>violations (i.e. loud parties or loud arguments) in a six month
>period, one stolen item (misdemeanor or felony theft by receiving),
>one marihuana plant (even if it belongs to your child or tenant), a
>gun in your car or possession, an assault rifle, solicitation of a
>prostitute or a syringe. It=92s no defense that your tenant or child did
>it without your knowledge or that someone borrowed your car. It=92s no
>defense that you=92ve taken steps to fix the problem once you=92ve been
>given notice.
>
>Worse, while the forfeiture action is triggered by criminal charges or
>municipal ordinance violations, it is filed in civil court, and
>because of the lower burden of proof in civil court you can lose your
>property even if you=92ve been acquitted in the criminal case. The City
>seizes your car or places notice on your home and dares you to fight
>to reclaim your own property. In civil court, since you face no
>possibility of jail, you have no constitutional right to counsel and
>hence must pay an attorney, fight it yourself, or default. If you
>can=92t afford a lawyer, too bad.
>
>The Denver City Attorney will likely tell you that this ordinance is
>necessary to stop gang crime, that they do not go after honest
>citizens and that we should place our faith in the benevolence of the
>bureaucracy. First, state law governs major crime and the other metro
>cities seem to keep the peace without this ordinance. Second, a simple
>reading of this law should make any civil libertarian break out in
>hives. Many of the offenses listed are simply not gang crime or gang
>related and many others often not. Further, the City Attorney has an
>active forfeiture department and the police budget includes
>forfeitures as a significant revenue source. The story of Bryan White,
>a client of mine, illustrates why this ordinance has no place in a
>society claiming to be free.
>
>Mr. White is a young man in his early twenties who works in a
>Westminster cafe. On September 20, 1997, Mr. White and some friends
>went cruising around Denver in a car belonging to his girlfriend,
>Linda Withers. The young men were riding around without incident when
>one or more needed to go to a restroom. Around 11:15 PM, they saw a
>Coastal station at 4th and Federal with the lights on and decided to
>use the restroom there. They did not notice that the station had
>closed, as they saw the lights were on. The bathroom at the side of
>the store was unlocked so they proceeded to use it without entering
>the convenience store. A Denver police officer arrived, allegedly
>suspecting a burglary. The officer asked Mr. White if there were any
>guns in the car. He honestly replied that it was his girlfriend=92s car
>and that she often kept a handgun in the glove compartment. The Denver
>police officer searched the car and cited Mr. White for trespass,
>unlawful carrying of a weapon and carrying of a concealed weapon. Ms.
>Withers car was seized as well.
>
>The City Attorney began forfeiture proceedings. Mr. White had
>committed no crime. We have all gone straight to the restroom without
>checking to see if the service station was open. If not for one of
>Denver county's finest judges, Ms. Withers would have lost her car and
>she certainly had committed no crime.
>
>The problems with Denver's Public Nuisance Ordinance go far beyond
>guns, gangs or drive-by shootings. It attacks one of our fundamental
>civil liberties, the right to own property. It was sold as a weapon
>against gangs but can and has been used to harass honest citizens.
>This law is so loosely written that more and more property will be
>seized for even the most minor of municipal ordinance violations.
>Colorado has adequate state laws to attack the serious crimes listed
>in this ordinance and Denver=92s district attorney applies them fairly
>and vigorously. Denver's Public Nuisance Ordinance is an offense
>against every good citizen who lives in, works in or passes through
>the community.
>
>It is ironic that the single biggest threat to our civil liberties in
>the city of Denver may very well be the city of Denver.
>
>---
> =FE OLX 2.2 =FE If guns cause crime then video cameras cause pornagraphy
>--- GOMail v1.1 [92-0793]
> * Origin: TEXAS PATRIOT - [phone] PRN Dallas TX (176:200/200)
>
>--
> (Ric Duncan)
>         AirPower Information Services BBS * 610-259-2193
>                     http://www.airpower.com
>FREE copy of 1st Reader! http://www.airpower.com/airpower.html
>
>
******************
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]
********************



- -

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

End of utah-firearms-digest V2 #34
**********************************