ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/utah-firearms/archive/v02.n044

Internet Message Format | 1998-04-10 | 43KB

From: [e-mail] (utah-firearms-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: utah-firearms-digest V2 #44
Reply-To: utah-firearms-digest
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


utah-firearms-digest     Saturday, April 11 1998     Volume 02 : Number 044




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

Date: Tue, 07 Apr 1998 12:33:39 -0600
From: "S. Thompson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Sarah Brady's Secret Attack Plan

Hi all!

Thanks to Scott for posting this.  If anyone has an actual verifiable copy
of this fax, would you please let me know as I'd like to get a copy.  Thanks!

Sarah


At 10:22 PM 4/5/98 -0700, you wrote:
>
>On Ed Wolfe's website, Nation In Distress:
>http://www.involved.com/ewolfe/distress/
>
>06/08/14 StTN 12:35 FAX Sarah Brady
>
>Dear Handgun Control Member,
>
>I have marked this letter to you "confidential" because I am requesting
>that you avoid discussing the contents publicly for the next several weeks.
>
>This is because we are about to initiate action that, if successful,
>will weaken the stranglehold that the gun industry, the NRA, and other
>gun fanatics have over local and national gun laws.
>
>And I am urgently requesting you to make an extraordinary gift to help
>strengthen our cause.
>
>Please let me quickly explain our plans; and then you will understand
>why both your generosity and secrecy are required.
>
>In brief, we believe there is a strong parallel between the gun industry
>and the tobacco companies! As you know, citizens at the local and state
>level rose up in anger and demanded clean air in restaurants and offices
>when Congress failed to take action.
>
>Here at Handgun Control Inc., it is our regrettable conclusion that this
>current Congress is not going to take the initiative on gun safety for
>America. Legislation is bogged down. The NRA and other gun industry lobbying
>groups have multi-million dollar war chests set aside for this election year.
>
>Consequently, it will be extremely difficult to pass any significant
>legislation this year.
>
>And so, even though we will not let up on our efforts in congress,
>our focus is going to make a dramatic shift.
>
>And we want to keep this shift as quiet as possible while we develop our
plan.
>
>In a few weeks, I will be announcing to the nation:
>
>The Citizens Campaign Against Community Gun Trafficking
>
>Even the title of this campaign will cause shockwaves to run through
>the gun industry and the NRA at local and national levels.
>
>We will be taking a page from the anti-smoking victories, where local
>ordinances banned smoking in public facilities and eventually forced
>state and national legislation to protest Americans' right to a
>smoke-free environment.
>
>And we'll remember the victories in the anti-drunk-driving movement, as well.
>
>M.A.D.D. was formed by a small group of mothers whose children had been
>killed by drunk drivers; they gathered supporters and strength at the
>grassroots level around the country, and before long these mothers
>started to be taken seriously everywhere, even on capitol Hill. Now,
>most states have tougher penalties for drunk drivers and the liquor
>industry is providing anti-drunk-driving messages in their advertising.
>
>In much the same way, we're going to attack the gun industry and the gun
>pushers at the most basic point; where money is exchanged for guns.
>
>The Attack point: Local Gun Shows!
>
>Local gun shows make it extremely easy to purchase a gun for private or
>criminal use. And that's because most of the guns at the shows are sold
>by private individuals, not by dealers; and, therefore, in most states
>they are not covered by laws requiring background checks or paperwork!
>
>So you can walk into a gun show, strike up a conversation with the guy
>hawking the M-l carbine, admire its light kick, repetitive fire, and
>ability to accept large magazine clips.
>
>Then you talk to that strange man parading around in his military
>fatigues, and later you meet him on the street, give him the necessary
>cash and the firearm is yours.
>
>All legal in most states, as long as that fellow is not a licensed gun
dealer!
>
>Loophole: The Second-Hand Market
>
>Right now, federal laws focus primarily on purchases of handguns from
>licensed dealers. And the Brady Handgun violence and prevention Act has
>stopped many criminals from buying handguns from licensed dealers.
>
>But most states have no laws preventing one individual from selling a
>weapon to another, as long as the seller is not a licensed gun dealer.
>
>"The individual purchasing the gun does not have to show identification,
>does not have to submit to background checks. And the person selling
>the gun does not need to keep a written record of the transaction or the
>buyer's address and social Security number. Also, quite obviously,
>there is no waiting period. All in all, this is the most outrageous
>loophole in our federal gun laws.
>
>And gun shows are where criminals do their shopping; where the
>second-hand gun market really thrives.
>
>And so, this is why one of our first goals in The Citizens Campaign Against
>Community Gun Trafficking is going to be to close down the gun shows!
>
>These gun shows are most often held on public property: civic centers,
>school gymnasiums, fairgrounds, city and county convention centers.
>
>And these giant weapons bazaars have developed considerable notoriety,
>because of such high-profile cases as Oklahoma City bomber Timothy
>Mcveigh, who was reported to have bought or sold weapons at gun shows.
>
>A recent issue of "Shotgun News", the "bible" of the gun pushers,
>advertised over 500 gun shows for the last three months of 1997 alone.
>And this does not include many of the smaller shows and swap meets.
>
>I believe that now you can see why our Citizens campaign Against
>Community Gun Trafficking is going to result in tremendous controversy.
>
>And I wish that we could keep it secret; 100% secret; until we are
>ready to launch the campaign.
>
>But, unlike the NRA and the right-wing, gun toting fanatics, we do not
>have a multi-million dollar war chest. We depend upon grassroots support
>from friends like you. And so I wanted to take the calculated risk and
>share this plan with you, and hope that you will step forward and send
>a significant gift to express your belief that citizens, with or without
>Congress, can get things done!
>
>In a few weeks, if you're interested, I will forward to you a 'Citizens
>Action Kit," detailing exactly what can be done in your local community.
>
>We intend to bring pressure upon mayors, city councils, school boards,
>churches, and all property owners to ban the use of any facility for gun
shows.
>
>Already, we are working with Dade county, Florida, mounting an all-out
>assault on gun shows in that area. I will be reporting to you about
>that innovative and successful initiative before long. But, as of
>now, we are not quite ready to go public with the results.
>
>But I must quickly bring this letter to a close, after I warn you that
>this is going to be a long, hard-fought campaign.
>
>After all, it took many, many years before the tobacco industry felt the
>heat of local citizens demanding a smoke-tree environment.
>
>So we must be patient, firm, determined and uncompromising.
>
>Our enemies will incorrectly and misleadingly scream about freedom of
>speech and freedom of assembly. But in turn, we will quietly remind
>them that America is involved in a gun war that is claiming 35,000
>lives each year including 9,OOO murdered by handguns.
>
>And we'll remind them that Americans must responsibly report transactions
>involving cars, liquor and other products. Why should gun sales be exempt?
>
>Every day 14 children, 19 years old and under, are killed by handguns. Much
>of this mayhem is made possible by the use of public property for gun shows.
>
>These statistics are tragic proof that a state of war exists.
>
>And, as you know, in my case, the statistic became personal heartbreak
>when my husband Jim was grievously wounded by a bullet intended for
>President Reagan.
>
>You and I must make America a safer place to live. Let's do it!
>
>P.S. I urge you to turn to the enclosed reply slip and write out a check
>in one of the amounts I've indicated. Or perhaps you can give more.
>But please do the best you can.
>
>I look forward to receiving your support, and I will trust in your silence
>as we prepare our citizens Campaign Against Community Gun Trafficking.
>
>
>
>-
>
>

- -

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

Date: Tue, 07 Apr 1998 12:49:08 -0600
From: "S. Thompson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Another poll

>A poll on MSNBC
>
>Asking about support for the Permanent ban on military assault style
>firearms.  Please VOTE
>
>http://www.msnbc.com/news/156278.asp


(I voted and it wouldn't show me the results.)

Sarah

- -

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

Date: Tue, 07 Apr 1998 18:24:57 -0600
From: "S. Thompson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Sarah Brady's Secret Attack Plan

I did a bit of checking into the alleged HCI Fax posted here previously.  I
wrote to Ed Wolfe who posted it on his site, and he referred me to Mike
Pietrantoni who sent me the following note.

>Hi Dr Thompson,
>    I am the one who originally put this up on the net the other day. It was
>faxed to me from John Statdmiller of the shortwave show "The Intelligence
>Report" with him and Mark Koernke. He personally called HCI and verified its
>authenticity.
>    If you would like you can reach him directly at 616 XXXX voice, or 616
>XXXX  fax.  (Phone numbers deleted by me - ST)
>    If I can be of any further assistence please let me know.
>    All the best.  Mike Pietrantoni
>

I also checked with Craig Fields at GOA.  His response follows.

GOA has received numerous questions regarding the validity
of a supposed communication from Sarah Brady to the
members of HCI, wherein it is mentioned that their next
target will be gun shows.

We don't doubt for a second that HCI would love to target
gun shows, but we are of the opinion that the "letter" is
in all likelihood a hoax.

There are quite a few reasons for us to conclude that,
although someone went to a considerable amount of trouble
to create something that looks genuine.

Let's just say that we are well aware of what HCI sends to
its members, and we haven't seen this one. The salutation
is different from what HCI uses nearly 100% of the time.
There are typos. The grammatical styling is both different
and of poorer quality than what HCI produces.

The hard copies we have seen lack a small but always
included graphical separator.

If this is indeed a hoax-- it is remotely possible that it
is genuine but that is quite a stretch-- the perpetrator
has done a disservice to our cause. The time you have spent
fretting over it could have been used to contact a
legislator or write a letter to the editor. The time we had
to spend checking this out could also have been spent in a
more productive manner. And of course, Internet hoaxes do
not die out easily.

Maybe some good can come out of this. If you aren't part of
the GOA E-Mail Alert Network, see below.

In liberty,

Craig.

- --Craig Fields
Director of Electronic Communications, GOA

Looks to me like it's probably a hoax, but judge for yourself.

Sarah




Sarah Thompson, M.D.
http://www.therighter.com

April 19, 1775 - The Battles of Lexington and Concord
April 19, 1783 - Congress proclaims victory in the American War of
Independence
April 19, 1933 - The US abandons the gold standard
April 19, 1943 - The Warsaw Ghetto Uprising
April 19, 1993 - The Branch Davidian Massacre at Waco
April 19, 1995 - The Oklahoma City bombing

What are YOU willing to do for freedom?

- -

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

Date: Tue, 07 Apr 98 20:06:00 -0700
From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: A GUN IS ONLY A TOOL

Heads Up - A Weekly View from the Foothills of Appalachia

April 5, 1998 #79

by: Doug Fiedor [e-mail]

- ------------------------------------------------------
Previous Editions at: http://mmc.cns.net/headsup.html
- ------------------------------------------------------

A GUN IS ONLY A TOOL

I am getting very tired of the socialist-liberal viewpoint in this country,
and I am about to publicly tell a number of them (journalists, this time)
to come up with some hard evidence to back up what they are saying or shut
the hell up!

This week, they're starting on the danger of citizen-owned guns again.
These mush-mouthed hand-ringing buttinskys keep telling America that guns
are bad. Guns are making our country a very dangerous land, they say.
Guns kill people, they repeat. It's like the frontier days out there all
over again, one babble-breath said. Listening to these fugitives from fact,
one would think that the nefarious pistol in the drawer next to me is
actually lying in wait for me to open the drawer so it can jump out and
shoot me.

A few years back I published a well circulated paper detailing the difference
in violent crime between the United States and four European countries where
guns are closely regulated. No matter that I used "official" FBI statistics,
I was immediately chastised for being politically incorrect.

Regardless, here's the basic (offending) data from the 1992 FBI Uniform
Crime Report. The numbers are related in incidents per 100,000 population:

Country ---- Murder ---- Robbery
- --------------------------------
U.S.A. ------ 9.3 ------- 263.0
England ----- 7.4 -------- 62.6
France ------ 4.6 -------- 90.4
Germany ----- 4.2 -------- 47.4
Italy ------- 6.0 -------- 68.6

If these numbers are taken on their face value, the United States is truly
more dangerous than these four European countries. However, a great deal of
the crime in the United States is committed by street gang punks and other
riffraff in the inner-city. The FBI did not correct for that. However, we
still can get some idea of the source of the problem by using their figures
for the race of the perpetrators.

Color Murder Robbery
- --------------------
White   5.1    126
Black  43.1  1,343

All I've got to say about these numbers is that my Black friends and
neighbors in Detroit intuitively knew them to be true. It was the liberal
press, and of course the politicians, who didn't want to hear this stuff.

The FBI defines justifiable homicide as being "limited to the killing of
a felon by a law enforcement officer in the line of duty, or the killing
by a private citizen of a felon during the commission of a felony." The
FBI reports that, in 1995, there were a total of 383 justifiable homicides
by police officers and another 286 by civilians. Most, of course, were
justifiable shootings by the use of a handgun.

The FBI identified 7,071 (31.5%) White and 8,285 (36.9%) Black murders
in 1995. Another 6,660 (29.7%) were of unknown race.

As politically incorrect as this information may be, these are the facts
as per the FBI, an organization currently under the control of liberals.
These data are posted on their web page for anyone to see. Yet, journalists
and politicians never bother to look.

The FBI report positively identifies 1,157 murders by juvenile gangs alone
- -- and that is just the ones they know about. They identify another 1,010
murders as drug related. And so on, and so on.

The cold hard fact is that, in the States where people own and use guns
the most, there are fewest murders. And it is a natural result, not a
statistical anomaly, that as States begin issuing concealed carry weapons
permits violent crime immediately decreases significantly. These are easily
verifiable facts, available to anyone with a computer. Yet, the political
nincompoops in Washington and their clue-less journalist sycophants persist
in fabricating and disseminating inaccurate information to the American
people. Well folks, it's time we have at them -- politically speaking,
of course.

I, for one, do not relish carrying around an extra two pounds of tooled
steel when I go out. However, even in the beautiful foothills of Appalachia,
that can sometimes be a wise thing to do. Therefore, it must always remain
my option.

Towards that end, we (many of us) would like to thank the Kentucky General
Assembly, which recently passed HB-318 to help secure the right of all
Americans to protect themselves. That bill will allow any licensed person,
from any State which issues concealed carry permits, to carry a concealed
weapon in Kentucky. It also orders the Kentucky State Police to secure
reciprocity agreements with all States that currently issue CCW's so that
Kentucky permit holders may carry in their respective States.

Read it and weep liberals. Sometimes, things work as they should.


- -

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

Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 11:30:35 -0600
From: [e-mail] (Charles Hardy)
Subject: [[e-mail]: April 15 column - wish list]

Not directly related to Utah gun issues, but a good read that touches
on the topic of gun ownership and use.

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

    FROM MOUNTAIN MEDIA
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE DATED APRIL 15, 1998
    THE LIBERTARIAN, By Vin Suprynowicz
    Wish list

    Occasional correspondent Bob wrote to ask me: "If you could repeal 10
federal laws, dismantle 10 federal agencies, or reverse 10 supreme court
decisions, which laws, agencies or decisions would you choose? I guess that
what I'm asking for is the libertarian 'hit list'."

  I warned Bob from the outset "There are a lot of pitfalls here, and room
for (interesting, but perhaps counterproductive) debate."

  Experience proves that such exercises in fantasy can lead to
not-very-useful squabbling about tactics and priorities, among folks who in
fact haven't a ghost of a chance of closing (start ital)any(end ital)
government ant farms, as things stand today.

  This only distracts our focus from the real enemy, the Cult of the
Omnipotent State.

  But, that said, I attempted to answer Bob in good faith:

    #   #   #

  For starters, I strongly disagree with the "pragmatic Republican"
concept, that you start by "closing" the DOC, the DOE, and the other DOE,
since they're the most useless and thus the "easiest to trim."

  The implication is that these operations would be like Guadalcanal and
North Africa, good live-fire warm-ups from which we would soon mobilize the
forces of freedom to capture Manila and Rome.

  In fact, the current nature of our politics is that -- once the federal
Department of Education is finally re-absorbed into some other federal
bureaucracy (with no net loss of federal employment) and cheerfully
declared "closed" -- the boys will all pat each other on the back and
retire to the bar, with no incentive to do any more "government-trimming"
for at least another election cycle.

  Sort of like starting the Second World War with the exploratory raids at
Dieppe and Makin Island, and then declaring victory and sending everyone
home.

  Instead, in this fantasy, we might do better to start by reversing the
1895 Supreme Court decision in Sparf and Hansen vs. United States, which
acknowledged juries had the right and POWER to "judge the law as well as
the fact," but ruled judges have no obligation to TELL jurors that ... the
pragmatic effect being that judges now frequently LIE OUTRIGHT, telling
juries "You will judge only the facts, deciding whether the law has been
broken, as I explain it to you. You are not permitted to worry about
whether the law is right or wrong, or whether the likely punishment is
fair, or anything like that. The law is up to the Legislature, and the
Supreme Court. ..."

  Obviously, this is nonsense, or we would never have had the John Peter
Zenger verdict, let along the eventual abandonment of such evil laws as
those against witchcraft, harboring runaway slaves, and purchase of
alcohol, which no jury would enforce, no matter how thoroughly the
prosecution proved "she done it."

  Instead, the Sparf court SHOULD have ruled that "In every jury trial, the
judge shall painstakingly instruct the jurors that it is not merely their
right, but also their duty, to apply their judgment and their common sense
to the question not just of whether the letter of the law has been
violated, but also whether said law is constitutional, and has been
appropriately applied in this case, in the interest of justice.

  "Obviously, if they believe the law violates any of the Great Rights
guaranteed by the first 10 Amendments, or was passed in excess of the
Legislature's EXPRESS delegated authority, they must set the defendant free
without ever COMING to the question of whether he or she committed the act
charged, since (under the wise precedent of Marbury vs. Madison), any law
which is unconstitutional, is null and void, and is to be treated as though
it never was.

  "Constitutionality of the law in question is the FIRST question this and
every jury must answer, for which purpose they shall be provided in their
chambers with a copy of the appropriate statute book, and of their state
and federal Constitutions, including the Bill of Rights, which (they will
be reminded) is the Supreme Law of the Land."

  While actually freeing up courts and police to provide speedier justice
for real, violent felons, this step would also serve the purpose of a quick
vaccination, safeguarding the liberties of our fellow citizens during
whatever time it takes us to deconstruct the rest of the collectivist
police state.

    #   #   #

  After that, eliminating the IRS and its claimed authority, the 16th
Amendment, would be paramount, since that would starve the beast.

  The degree of slavery and invasion of privacy to which we have grown
accustomed under that regime is incalculable. Imagine being asked by a
federal agent, "What's your address? Show me some ID. What's your Social
Security number? How much did you earn last year?" and being able to reply:
"None of those things are any of your business. I have no 'number.' I won't
tell you whether I use any bank, or if so where. Yes, I happen to have
$400,000 in cash in this bag, with no record of where I got it, or what I
plan to do with it. And if you try to take a single dollar, I will shoot
you dead, and every man here will buy me a beer for my trouble. Any other
questions?"

  It would not generally be pragmatic to say such things today, so beaten
down and accustomed are our fellow sufferers (and prospective jurors) to
the role of docile, unquestioning beef cattle for our federal masters. With
the income-tax amendment repealed, however, it would become obvious to all
that this is the only proper response to any government attempt to invade
our financial privacy.

  Next, of course, would have to come the shutting down the DEA and the
repeal of all drug laws -- or overturning them for violating the Ninth
Amendment, which they all do. (A constitutional amendment was required to
authorize alcohol Prohibition, in 1919. When did we ratify the amendments
authorizing Prohibition of previously-legal opium, cocaine and marijuana?)

  Uptight, blue-blazer "nerf libertarians" will whimper that this sounds as
though our politics are merely a shield for permissiveness on drug use. In
fact, I see no sign that any drug law has ever REDUCED drug use, so that's
a red herring.

  (All such Prohibitions are merely failed bluffs. We bluff that if the
minority youths won't stop using their drugs of choice, we'll put them all
in prison ... hoping a few examples will convince them. Instead, they keep
using marijuana and cocaine, so we're well on the way to putting them all
in prison. But the original goal was not to build a huge prison industry,
but to bluff them out of using their drugs of choice ... remember? The
bluff has FAILED, long ago ... so badly that they're now even using their
drugs of choice, IN prison.)

    #   #   #

  I choose the drug laws because they're the ones most commonly used to
justify shredding and defecating all over the rest of the Bill of Rights,
though they're followed closely by ...

  All federal firearms laws, starting with the big Firearms Acts of 1934
and 1968, both of which blatantly violate and dishonor the Second
Amendment. Repeal or overturn them all, and disallow any future government
sinecures or paychecks for any past or present agents of the ATF (while
indicting a good many for fraud, coercion, treason, and depriving citizens
of their civil rights under color of law). We would then find ourselves
with an ARMED population of fully-informed jurors -- free men and women,
peaceable and polite, no longer afraid of their own government.

  If the source of all power is in the people, and government agents are
our servants, then it is only the ARMED CITIZEN who can ask the GOVERNMENT
OFFICIAL to unload and hand over his or her firearm until our conversation
is concluded. Law-abiding citizens will peaceably submit to arrest by
unarmed officers, as the Brits have been proving for a century. But only if
they believe they will have a fair chance to explain their case to a
RANDOMLY-SELECTED and fully-informed jury of their peers, and in a hurry.

  Of course, we could just as well get rid of virtually any department,
program, or allocation dreamed up since 1912. But I think the above would
be a good morning's work, in terms of demonstrating how well America could
survive -- as it happily and prosperously did from 1781 to 1912 -- with
liberties restored, and the entire police state put out to pasture.

  You don't rediscover the Sleeping Beauty of liberty or the Constitution
by delicately pruning away dead twigs from the outside of the thicket. You
have to go in with bulldozers, hewing broad access corridors to the castle
on Day One, while you're at your strongest.


Vin Suprynowicz is the assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas
Review-Journal. Readers may contact him via e-mail at [e-mail]. The web
site for the Suprynowicz column is at http://www.nguworld.com/vindex/. The
column is syndicated in the United States and Canada via Mountain Media
Syndications, P.O. Box 4422, Las Vegas Nev. 89127.

***


Vin Suprynowicz,   [e-mail]

"The right of self-defense is the first law of nature; in most governments
it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest
limits possible.  Wherever standing armies are kept up, and when the right
of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext
whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the
brink of destruction." -- Henry St. George Tucker, in Blackstone's 1768
"Commentaries on the Laws of England."




- ----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.

"Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it." --
 Santayana

- -

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 08:40:17 -0700
From: DAVID SAGERS <[e-mail]>
Subject: vote in NBC poll -Forwarded

Received: (from smap@localhost) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id DAA10096; Tue, 7 Apr 1998 03:21:27 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 03:21:27 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1) by fs1.mainstream.net via smap (V1.3)
    id sma010038; Tue Apr  7 03:19:10 1998
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Originator: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk
From: EdgarSuter <[e-mail]>
To: Multiple recipients of list <[e-mail]>
Subject: vote in NBC poll
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list

 ---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 06 Apr 1998 05:20:59 -0500
From: John Wilson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: ANOTHER POLL

Another poll on MSNBC

Asking about support for the Permanate ban on military assault style
firearms.  GO VOTE

http://www.msnbc.com/news/156278.asp

John Wilson
[e-mail]



- -

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 08:52:03 -0700
From: DAVID SAGERS <[e-mail]>
Subject: NBC Boycott -Forwarded

Received: from fs1.mainstream.net
    ([206.97.102.4])
    by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Thu, 09 Apr 1998 08:04:09 -0600
Received: (from smap@localhost) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id KAA09725; Thu, 9 Apr 1998 10:01:08 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 10:01:08 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1) by fs1.mainstream.net via smap (V1.3)
    id sma009649; Thu Apr  9 09:57:04 1998
Message-Id: <v01510103b151c046241c@[209.20.135.207]>
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: NBC Boycott
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list

>Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 11:42:15 -0400 (EDT)
>X-Sender: [e-mail]
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>To: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail],
>        [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail],
>        [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail],
>        [e-mail]
>From: Mitch Rosen <[e-mail]>
>Subject: NBC Boycott
>
>   From: Robert P. Firriolo <[e-mail]>
>Subject: NBC BOYCOTT - LIRR "INCIDENT" TV MOVIE
>   Date: 04/07/98 07:59 PM
>
>NBC TV Movie Set to Attack RKBA and NRA
>
>Variety is reporting that the upcoming TV movie on the LIRR massacre
>entitled "The Incident on Long Island" will contain unrestrained attacks
>on the NRA and politicians (by name) who voted to repeal the "assault
>weapon" ban.  "Incident" is a fluff piece on notoriously anti-gun Rep.
>Carolyn McCarthy (D, NY) and is produced by Barbra Streisand.
>
>Consider the following quote from Amy Archerd's 4/7/98 Variety story:
>
>       [Director Joe] Sargent, now in final post on the
>        TriStar-NBC project, tells me the script explains
>        how the NRA errs in its claims of protection for
>        the Second Amendment. A lobbyist in the movie
>        states, "Did you know that former Chief Justice
>        Burger called the NRA's misrepresentation of the
>        Second Amendment one of the greatest pieces of fraud
>        on the American public by special interest groups
>        that he'd ever seen -- the Second Amendment has never
>        been about the right of an individual to bear arms!
>        It's about the right to arm a militia. A well-
>        regulated militia."
>
>This program is scheduled to be broadcast by NBC on May 3, during
>"sweeps week."  For those who do not know, that is the period when TV
>ratings are most carefully analyzed. Among other things, it allows
>broadcasters to set advertising rates based on the popularity of their
>shows.  It is a safe bet that NBC will rerun the program before the
>November election, too, as Rep. McCarthy is running for re-election for
>the first time.
>
>Let me be the first to suggest contacting NBC and informing them that
>not only will you and your family not watch the show, but you will
>boycott all sponsors who advertise on the program.  Tell them we will
>not stand for intentional distortions of fact and slander of the NRA,
>RKBA, and our political allies.
>
>If this promise of a boycott picks up steam, it may be hard for NBC to
>sell advertising for the program.  I doubt we can keep it off the air,
>but we can make these anti-freedom Hollywood elite's jobs tougher.  We
>may even get them to edit out the anti-gun content, but I wouldn't hold
>my breath waiting for that to happen.
>
>We have to try, though.  Start contacting NBC now.
>
>Send your comments to [e-mail].
>
>Please forward and cross-post.
>
>__________________
>Robert P. Firriolo
>
>*******************************************************************
>"Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the people
> at large, than to have them properly armed and equipped."
>
>                     - Alexander Hamilton
>                       The Federalist Papers - Number 29
>*******************************************************************
>




- -

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

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 17:15:07 -0700
From: DAVID SAGERS <[e-mail]>
Subject: I just called BATF re magazine ban (fwd) -Forwarded

Received: from fs1.mainstream.net
    ([206.97.102.4])
    by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Thu, 09 Apr 1998 16:51:41 -0600
Received: (from smap@localhost) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id SAA03491; Thu, 9 Apr 1998 18:48:48 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 18:48:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1) by fs1.mainstream.net via smap (V1.3)
    id sma003301; Thu Apr  9 18:47:25 1998
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Originator: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk
From: [e-mail]
To: Multiple recipients of list <[e-mail]>
Subject: I just called BATF re magazine ban (fwd)
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list





- ---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 16:29:54 -6
From: Dan Day <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: I just called BATF re magazine ban

Posted to texas-gun-owners by "Dan Day" <[e-mail]>
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
I was curious about the extent of the full ramifications of
Feinstein's "big magazine ban", so I called up the text of
the bill at the GPO site.  It's short and sweet, and just
does two simple things:
   1.  Outlaws importation of any large magazine, by anyone, period.
       (A "large magazine" is any magazine over 10 rounds which
       is not a tubular .22 magazine).
   2.  Makes it illegal to "transfer" any large magazine (except
       by the government elite, of course).

It would remain legal to continue to own any pre-1994 magazines
that you already have in your possession.

Note, however, the word "transfer" in #2 above.  What, exactly,
is legally considered a "transfer"?  Not knowing the finer points
of that myself, I decided to call the folks who would be in charge
of actually enforcing that law.  The local Houston BATF office
wasn't really sure, so they referred me to the ATF's Assistant
Chief Counsel office in Dallas.  There, an ATF lawyer answered the
phone, and was quite helpful.

"Transfer", as you would expect, includes sale, trade, pawn, or
giving as a gift, since clearly a transfer of legal ownership is
a "transfer".  However, I was surprised to learn that the courts
have also decreed that borrowing, using, or handling an item that
belongs to someone else is also considered a "transfer", even if
the owner is standing right there next to you.  The ATF attorney
mentioned a late-70's 5th Circuit Court case in which someone was
nailed for simply handling a machine gun long enough to shoot it
at a range while the owner was standing nearby.  The attorney
also opined that technically you could get busted for an illegal
"transfer" for simply handing a magazine to someone for them to
look at for ten seconds.

Yes, that's right -- if Feinstein's bill passes, you can become a
convicted felon under federal law if *anyone* besides you handles
your magazine, or however briefly shoots your firearm if it has a
large magazine in it (as many modern pistols do).

I also asked him what happens to your magazines when you die,
since there's no legal way they can be "transferred" from your
estate to a new owner.  He admitted that this was a good
question, and he had no idea as to what the answer would be.  Laws
concerning NFA weapons (e.g. machine guns) have an explicit
"death transfer" clause, but Feinstein's ban does not.  It seems
to me that technically even picking up your magazine (from your
cold dead fingers) to take it away to be destroyed would be
considered an illegal transfer.

Finally, I was amused that when I asked the ATF attorney if I
had his permission to mention his name in this article, he replied
"I'd really rather you didn't"...
- --
For help with Majordomo commands, send a message to [e-mail]
with the word help in the message body.



- -

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

Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 16:34:12 -0700
From: DAVID SAGERS <[e-mail]>
Subject: NRA Alert -Forwarded

Received: from fs1.mainstream.net
    ([206.97.102.4])
    by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Fri, 10 Apr 1998 14:20:37 -0600
Received: (from smap@localhost) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id QAA02968; Fri, 10 Apr 1998 16:18:29 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 16:18:29 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1) by fs1.mainstream.net via smap (V1.3)
    id sma002864; Fri Apr 10 16:17:08 1998
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Originator: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk
From: JT McBride <[e-mail]>
To: Multiple recipients of list <[e-mail]>
Subject: NRA Alert
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list


Haven't seen this on the list yet:

Call your senators today (4/9/98).  Tell them to support Sen. Craig's
amendment (S.Amdt. 1604) to override Komrade Klinton's recent gun ban by
executive order.  All the guns he just banned are legal under the rules
he made in 1994.

Senate phone no.:  202-224-3121

also call your representative at 202-224-3121 and tell him to support
the companion bill, H.R. 2734.

CALL EVERYONE YOU KNOW AND TELL THEM TO DO THIS TODAY!!!

L. Mahanay



- -

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

Date: Fri, 10 Apr 98 23:23:00 -0700
From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: MinuteMan Alert Network

- ---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 14:12:53 -0500
From: JVS <[e-mail]>
To: FRATRUM <[e-mail]>,
 IGNITION POINT <[e-mail]>
Subject: Please Forward

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

*** A Special Message From Larry Pratt, Executive Director
of Gun Owners of America ***

Dear Fellow American:

It happened in Nazi Germany about (60) years ago.

It is happening in England as of July 1, 1997.

It has even happened in New York City, New York.

First, gun registration. Then, gun confiscation.

In Congress anti-gunners are still on the offensive toward
their goal of a complete ban on private firearms ownership.

As you may know, Gun Owners of America is the
no-compromise gun rights lobby organization supported by
hundreds of thousands of pro-gun friends across America.

Our position on gun control is: It's not Constitutional.
And to make sure politicians get the message, we work with
grassroots pro-gunners.

Gun Owners of America and our members have no problem
saying to the legislators who want to sell-out our rights
"Don't tread on me and my gun rights."

In Washington, Gun Owners of America fights legislative
battles to protect your gun rights.

However, sometimes the best defense is a good offense.

In fact, in over a half a dozen states -- in 1997 alone --
Gun Owners of America staff and members have been working
with state legislatures to repeal laws that force gun owners
to get a permission slip in order to carry a gun concealed.

We are also on the offensive to push for a "Vermont-style"
concealed carry law that simply says every law abiding
citizen has the right to carry a gun concealed. There are
no government hoops, no fingerprints, no mandatory
training, no forms, no licenses, and no fees.

This is Gun Owners of America's position: NO GUN CONTROL ALLOWED.

Now it's time to take that aggressive offensive approach to
reclaiming our gun rights to legislative battles in
Washington D.C. and your state capital.

Will you join the effort?

I AM ASKING YOU TO JOIN OUR FREE LEGISLATIVE ALERT AND
ACTION NETWORK -- THE MINUTEMAN ALERT.

MinuteMan Alert participants receive timely communication
alerts (via e-mail) when there are bills or other actions
being made in Washington or your state capital.

As a participant, you'll get the facts you need to let the
politicians know just where you -- the pro-gun voter -- stand
and what the politician must do.

Your action will apply pressure to legislators when they need it
the most. Together with other gun rights supporters you and I can
make the legislator "feel the heat" until they "see the light."

As you know, petitioning an elected official is a powerful
legislative tool.

Elected officials fear angry voters. That is why grass-roots
action is so powerful. It reminds elected officials that
they are there to serve the people and will be held
accountable by the people.

But you know that when push comes to shove, politics is a numbers game.

Hundreds means more than tens, and thousands mean more than hundreds.

That is why I am asking you to subscribe, right now, to Gun
Owners of America's MinuteMan Alert. Every person counts.
You can make the difference.

ITS EASY TO SUBSCRIBE, HERE'S HOW:

1) SEND AN E-MAIL MESSAGE (OR FORWARD THIS MESSAGE) TO [e-mail]

2) BE SURE TO INDICATE WHICH STATE YOU LIVE IN AND LIST THAT
INFORMATION IN THE SUBJECT LINE OR BODY OF THE MESSAGE.

After you send Gun Owners of America a request to subscribe, you
should shortly thereafter receive a confirmation e-mail from our office.

After that, you will receive alerts as they become necessary.

I hope that you will subscribe to Gun Owners of America's
MinuteMan Alert Network. As you can tell, there is nothing
to lose -- it is a free service. All I ask is that you try
to take the requested action in the alerts you receive.

Also, please know that your e-mail address will remain confidential.

If you would like more information you may call our main phone
number [703-321-8585] and request an information pack on Gun Owners
of America or you may e-mail your request to: [e-mail]

You may also visit our Internet Web Site at http://www.gunowners.org

I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Larry Pratt
Executive Director
Gun Owners of America, Inc.
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102
Springfield, VA 22151
E-Mail: [e-mail]


- -

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

End of utah-firearms-digest V2 #44
**********************************