ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/utah-firearms/archive/v02.n063

Internet Message Format | 1998-05-27 | 43KB

From: [e-mail] (utah-firearms-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: utah-firearms-digest V2 #63
Reply-To: utah-firearms-digest
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


utah-firearms-digest      Thursday, May 28 1998      Volume 02 : Number 063




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

Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 20:27:11 -0600
From: "S. Thompson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Get an early start on summer vacation! -Forwarded

At 04:49 PM 5/27/98 -0600, Charles Hardy wrote:
>
>On Wed, 27 May 1998, "S. Thompson" <[e-mail]> posted:
>
>>    Yes, school faculty members should be allowed to, or even encouraged to,
>>carry concealed.  But _required_?
>>That's absolute idiocy, not to mention a violation of civil liberties.
>
>Not at all.  There are any number of requirements imposed with
>teaching in a government run school--or any other job.  We require
>(supposedly) teachers to be proficent in any number of things not
>directly part of their job.  EG, math and science teachers must be
>proficient in written and spoken english.  Before you say that is
>obvious and clearly necessary to their job, go take a math or science
>course at a major university which does not impose this requirement.
>You can learn math or science from someone who is far from proficient
>in english.  It's tough, but it can be done.
    The schools have failed utterly in providing teachers who are even
proficient in English at a low high school level, much less any "esoteric"
knowledge, such as math, science, history, or arts.  That needs to be the
first goal.  If public school teachers were as proficient with firearms as
they are at writing sentences in English, I'd be terrified to live near a
school, much less send my child to one!  While it may be theoretically
possible to train teachers to use firearms, I seriously doubt that it's
actually possible, at least in our current society.
    Secondly, requiring proficiency in teaching skills and knowledge is a
reasonable requirement that violates no one's civil liberties.  However, I
can find no definition of teacher that includes the duties of armed guard.
It is, of course, possible to change the definition and requirements for
teachers, but such a change can't be done abruptly.
    Also, as self-defense advocates we must be careful to be consistent.
Many people here have raised the issue of bans on knives being an
infringement of the religious rights of Sikhs, who are required to carry a
specific type of knife.  If we are going to insist that the rights of Sikhs
be respected, should we not be equally vigilant to defend the rights of
Quakers and Buddhists whose religious beliefs generally preclude carrying
firearms?  If someone is a good teacher, I can see no reason to prevent him
from teaching whether he's a Sikh who wishes to carry a knife to school or
a Quaker who refuses to carry a firearm.   And what do we do about teachers
who have physical handicaps that prevent them from handling a firearm
safely?  Should a teacher who has an episode of serious depression that
requires involuntary hospitalization lose her job forever, even if she's
successfully treated?
    I don't like _ex post facto_ laws applied to gun owners and they're not
any better when applied to teachers.

>More closely related to requiring CCW are requirements that teachers
>be trained in first aid including CPR.  Teachers, especially grade
>school teachers, are more than just instructors.  They are given, and
>accept, a high degree of responsibility for their students safety
>during the day. Requiring a knowledge of first aid is only prudent.  A
>similar argument may be made for carrying guns.
    I don't know of any rational reason for refusing to learn CPR for kids,
although I suspect that some teachers are probably exempt from this
requirement also, due to physical problems that prevent their performing
CPR.  (I know some health care professionals get such exemptions.)  But
many, if not most, teachers sincerely believe that possession of a firearm
is morally unacceptable.  And for some teachers, particularly those who
work with emotionally disturbed, or "at-risk" youth, carrying a firearm and
having all the students _know_ you carry it, could present a very real
danger of students ganging up on a teacher to get the gun.  Those people
who chose a career in teaching in good faith, should not suddenly be told
they must carry a firearm at all times or lose their jobs.  If they'd
wanted to carry a gun at work all day every day, they'd probably have
chosen a career in law enforcement.  Again, we must be consistent.  If we
object to military and law enforcement officers losing their jobs because
of _ex post facto_ laws, we shouldn't be rushing to inflict such laws on
teachers.

>>    Besides, how would you enforce it?
>
>Just as any other requirement is enforced.  Testing and certification.
    And "showing metal" at the door every day before you're allowed in to teach?

>>What standards of proficiency would
>>you require?
>
>Somewhere between a current CCW and POST certification I should think.
    I think it should be more stringent than POST.  Most law enforcement
personnel shoot at adults who are at least presumed to be criminals.  A
teacher defending a class would most likely have to shoot _at a student_ in
a school full of kids.  Even if the student is a criminal, I think higher
standards should be used when shooting a 15 year old than when shooting at
an adult.  In fact, I suspect that most of the gunowners I know would have
great difficulty shooting a teenager, even with good cause.  I know I would.

>>Who would pay for the firearms, ammo and training?
>
>The cost of all are insignificant compared to the cost of the college
>education already required to teach.  The cost of that education (and
>much of the continuing education required) is born by teachers
>already, although schools could help cover those costs if they chose.
    That makes sense if you're looking at requiring firearms proficiency as a
requirement for a teaching degree.  But it doesn't work as well if you're
going to impose it as a new requirement.  And do you let teachers carry any
firearm they choose, or do you standardize it like the police do?  If you
model it on the police, then I think the taxpayers pay for guns and ammo,
which for each teacher is a considerable expense, especially when you
consider Utah's already abysmally low funding of schools.

>>Who would
>>bear the liability should a teacher, acting in good faith during a crisis,
>>shoot a student or other faculty member?
>
>The same entity that bears the liability if a teacher, acting in good
>faith during a crisis, should inflict injury administering first aid.
    To the best of my knowledge, the schools and their employees are exempt
from all liability related to job duties.  It appears that law enforcement
now has a license to kill.  Do we really want to give teachers that same
license to kill?  Especially considering how frustrating and thankless
their jobs already are?  Do we want teachers shooting kids because they see
a glint of metal from car keys, or even from a "Three Musketeers" bar -
knowing they're exempt from all liability?

>>My kids already miss far too many
>>days of school because their teachers are attending seminars, having
>>"career enhancement days", "preparation days", "morale-building" days, and
>>any other excuse they can come up with to not teach.  I don't want the kids
>>to lose another day a week so the teachers can go practice at the range.
>
>Even cops are not required to practice shooting on a weekly basis.  If
>you can pass the annual competancy tests in shooting without practice,
>so be it.  If you have to practice every night, that is your problem.
    And we both know how poorly police perform "in the field" compared with
"civilian" gun owners.  I don't think that level of competence is
acceptable in a school setting.  And if the UEA thinks that their teachers
are far too overworked to "allow" someone else to teach an Eddie Eagle
class, imagine the fuss if we actually required firearms proficiency!

>>    And teachers are not perfect.  Some of them probably would not even meet
>>the requirements for CCW.
>
>There are doubtless people who would like to teach who do not meet the
>requirments for English, history, etc.  There are people who would
>love to be doctors but can't pass required exams to get into or
>graduate medical school or maybe even pass the boards once they
>graduate.  If you don't meet the requirements for a given profession,
>trade, or occupation you better find a different one.
    Personally, I think anyone who wants to "practice medicine" should be free
to do so, and licensing requirements should be abolished as the restraint
of trade that they are.  If I need a board-certified surgeon, I'll find
one, without the help of the state.  If I'd rather be treated by a
practitioner of "Therapeutic Touch", I have that right.  If I choose to
have a chicken waved over my head, that's also my right.
    But that's slightly off topic.  The teachers currently teaching _do_ meet
the requirements for teaching, or at least we're told they do.  What you're
suggesting is roughly equivalent to declaring that all doctors who don't
get a certificate in computer systems administration will lose their
licenses.  After all, all medical records and insurance claims are now
computerized, and protecting medical records is important, so doctors
"need" to have these skills.  But I know quite a few excellent docs who are
minimally proficient with computers.
    As a society, we simply can't afford to lose large numbers of skilled
teachers, doctors, law enforcement officers, etc. simply because we decide
to change the rules in midstream.

>IF we decide that government school teachers must be proficient in
>basic self defense using a gun in order to be entrusted with our
>children for 8 hours a day, then it is their responsibility to do so.
    What if they all just say "no"?  Tyranny is tyranny.  I would refuse to
work or even volunteer at a school because they require background checks
and fingerprinting.  I consider requiring a CCW (with the requisite
background checks and fingerprinting) just as tyrannical.  The same goes
for drug screening, or any other invasion of privacy.  Advocating tyranny
"for the children" is just candy-coating the tyranny, and it doesn't change
anything.  Advocates of freedom and Constitutional rights should not be
advocating infringing the rights of others.  As much as I dislike Lily
Eskelson, I'm obligated to defend _her_ Constitutional rights as ardently
as I defend my own.

>I personnaly wouldn't require it just because there are so many
>teachers who are good teachers who would likely have trouble with it.
>But I would allow and even encourage via financial incentive, teachers
>to become proficient and CCW.
    I agree.  We'd lose too many good teachers by requiring it.  But I have no
problem with encouraging teachers to carry, and/or rewarding those who do.
(I suspect we're in far more agreement on this issue than it might appear...)

    I think ultimately we need to change society so that carrying a firearm,
openly or concealed, is a normal, everyday, and unremarkable activity, and
almost all citizens know how to handle and use a firearm safely, just as
most people today know how to drive (and even small children know either to
stay out of the street or how to cross streets safely).  In a society where
most adults were proficient with firearms, it would be much easier to get a
"critical mass" of teachers who carried - although I'd still oppose any
absolute requirement.  But we don't have that society today, and we're not
going to create it overnight.  It's a worthy goal for people in all walks
of life.  I just don't see any reason to single out teachers for such a
requirement.  Why not bus drivers, doctors, bank tellers, or even postal
workers?
    And while I'm not accusing you of pettiness, I think some people in the
"gun rights community" who suggest such things may be being petty.
Teachers and their unions/organizations have long been among our most
potent and vocal opponents and in some of the suggestions I've seen to
"force" teachers to carry guns I've detected a vengefulness that I find
inappropriate, unbecoming, and potentially counterproductive.
    I know that you reject force as a tool for social change and I suspect
you'd agree that educating people regarding the benefits of firearms
ownership is far preferable to passing unenforceable, _ex post facto_ laws
and regulations.

>>    The only light I can see coming out of this whole mess is that parents may
>>finally wake up and figure out that the NEA/UEA are creating schools that
>>are so dangerous to everyone, and so ineffective at teaching, that they
>>ought to be just abolished.
>
>Amen.
    Which of course leaves us with the task of designing schools and producing
teachers who can educate and protect our children and help them to grow
into responsible citizens.  Our kids, and unfortunately too many of our
teachers, lack a solid foundation in academics.  Teachers with guns and
Eddie Eagle are only a tiny part of the solution.

Sarah


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

GO JAZZ!!!!

- -

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

Date: Wed, 27 May 98 18:55:00 -0700
From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: PROVEN SOLUTIONS TO ENDING SCHOOL SHOOTINGS 1/2

- ---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 23:31:05 -0700
To: [e-mail]
From: DOV <[e-mail]>

****JPFO e-mail Alert!****

Jews For The Preservation of Firearms Ownership, Inc.
Aaron Zelman - Executive Director
2874 So. Wentworth Ave.
Milwaukee, WI 53207
Ph. [phone] Fax [phone]
http://www.JPFO.org
[e-mail]

05/21/98
- --------

****URGENT!! CROSS POST FAR AND WIDE!!!****

We apologize for the length of this e-mail. However, due to the
extreme severity of the problem we are now facing of more "gun
control", we feel strongly compelled to send this. Consider this
an emergency alert.

Stand by for a media-driven panic. The recent murders committed by
a teenage boy at school in Oregon will stimulate more anti-firearms
rhetoric. There will be calls for more "gun control" and even
outright prohibition of all firearms. Defenders of liberty and the
Bill of Rights must be prepared to change the terms of the debate.

JPFO members and other rights defenders should take the ideas
from this alert and send brief letters to their local newspapers
and legislators and governors. We need to beat the "gun
prohibitionists" to the punch ... if we don't, we can be sure
their lobbyists will be running unobstructed at full power.

Understand.....we are moments away from seeing British & Canadian
style "gun control" shoved down our throats. It always starts with
a crisis. Well, the gun prohibitionists crisis IS here. This is
now the 6th school shooting THIS YEAR ALONE.

We either decide to become involved NOW, or prepare to see draconian
firearms laws, as we have never seen before in this land, this year.


PROVEN SOLUTIONS TO ENDING SCHOOL SHOOTINGS
copyright, Jews For The Preservation of Firearms Ownership

EDITOR'S NOTE: This exclusive interview, copyright by JPFO,
puts to rest the ongoing debate of how to deal with the ever
increasing violence and bloodshed in America's schools, by
showing proven solutions (not just theories) to the problem.
Rest assured the answer is not in more "gun control", as
the gun prohibitionists would want to brainwash America
into believing. In fact, the problem IS gun control.

JPFO: Tell us about your background, and your involvement with
firearms, and the right to keep and bear arms.

SCHILLER: The name is Dr. David Th. Schiller, currently residing
in the little town of Nassau, 70 km northwest of Frankfurt. I work
as editor-in-chief of VISIER, a 168 page strong general interest
gun magazine which I started eleven years ago in Stuttgart and
which has now grown to be the most influential and best selling
gun magazine in all of Europe. Of course with a gun magazine
published in Germany, politics are at the forefront of our
editorial work, and we have an eye toward the past. NRA's Steve
Halbrook has just been over here and I was glad to help him with
his research on Jewish resistance during WWII.

I was born in (West) Berlin in '52 in Germany, moved to Israel in
'72 and served in the Israel Defense Force's Airborne, which means
I am now a veteran of the '73 war, the Lebanese war, and a number
of border raids and actions in the occupied territories. Wounded in
1973 on Suez canal, I later studied political science at West Berlin's
Free University and mastered with a thesis on the origins of the Civil
War in Lebanon and a Ph.D. in '82 with a work on the Palestinians'
"love affair" with terrorism and paramilitary activity. When I
returned to Germany in '74-'75 for studies I was called upon by the
Berlin Police department to consult and teach their SWAT team, which
just came into being after the Munich massacre during the Munich
Olympics. Over the years this extended into a whole series of work
obligations with various police departments in Germany and other
places in the world. Due to my work in the Israel Defense Force
(IDF) as a drill instructor and weapons specialist and through my
academic interest, I had something to teach to these people. I also
worked some years for the terrorism research department of Santa
Monica's RAND Corporation, and have continued my academic pursuits.

Over the years I published a number of books on shooting, police,
terrorism, military history etc., most of these under the pseudonym
of "Jan Boger". You probably might find a photographic journal of
mine in English on the IDF, called "To Live in the Fire...",
published in 1977 by the John Olson Publishing Co. in New Jersey.

As you can see, I experienced violence and gun control from both ends
of the barrel, one might say. And of course, I grew up to be a strong
believer in the personal right to self defense, especially as I spent
my childhood in the Berlin equivalent of the Bronx.

JPFO: What kind of advice could you give the USA to combat the recent
school massacres that seemingly have become quite common upon our soil?

SCHILLER: Now for Jonesboro and the US gun control laws in regard to
schools: Way back in 1973 - '74 I lived in a Kibbutz in Northern
Israel, called Ramat Yochanan. During Passover week in '74 we in
Galilee experienced the first of a number of PLO attacks specifically
targeting schools and children's houses, kindergartens, school buses
and the like. It started with an infiltration in Quiriat Schmoneh on
the Passover weekend, where the perpetrators found the school empty
and locked (of course during the holidays!) and took over a nearby
residential building, shooting people and in the end blowing themselves
up. A few weeks later the worst of this series of incidents took place
in Maalot on May 15th: Three PLO gunmen, after making their way
through the border fence, first shot up a van load full of workers
returning from a tobacco factory (incidentally these people happened
to be Galileean Arabs, not Jews), then they entered the school compound
of Maalot. First they murdered the housekeeper, his wife and one of
their kids, then they took a whole group of nearly 100 kids and their
teachers hostage. These were staying overnight at the school, as they
were on a hiking trip. In the end, the deadline ran out, and the army's
special unit assaulted the building. During the rescue attempt,
the gunmen blew their explosive charges and sprayed the kids with
machine-gun fire. 25 people died, 66 wounded.

After this a controversial debate erupted in Israel in regards to
guns, self defense etc. We heard of course the same dumb arguments
by some good people, you always hear on these occasions like "We do
not live in the Wild West here!" Or: "Guns don't solve problems!"
or similar silly things.


- -

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

Date: Wed, 27 May 98 18:55:00 -0700
From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: PROVEN SOLUTIONS TO ENDING SCHOOL SHOOTINGS 2/2

JPFO: Were there any gun laws in Israel in those days?

SCHILLER: Now, one has to remember, that Israel still had and has
most of the old and very strict gun laws dating back to the days of
the British Mandatory (1918-1948) on the books, and we in the
promised land have meanwhile grown our share of idiotic bureaucrats
and dumb politicians, too. But with the help of some smart people,
not the least the then Commander-in-Chief, Northern Command Paratroop
General Raful Eytan, all the reservists on the settlements were
issued their personal weapons, and whoever had a clean track record
could get a concealed weapons permit. I for instance had and still
have one.

JPFO: What happened then?

SCHILLER: Teachers and kindergarten nurses now started to carry
guns, schools were protected by parents (and often grandpas) guarding
them in voluntary shifts. No school group went on a hike or trip
without armed guards. The Police involved the citizens in a voluntary
civil guard project "Mishmar Esrachi", which even had its own sniper
teams. The Army's Youth Group program, "Gadna", trained 15 - 16 year
old kids in gun safety and guard procedures and the older high school
boys got involved with the Mishmar Esrachi. During one noted incident,
the "Herzliyah Bus massacre" (March '78, hijacking of a bus, 37 dead,
76 wounded), these youngsters were involved in the overall security
measures in which the whole area between North Tel Aviv and the resort
town of Herzlyiah was blocked off, manning roadblocks with the police,
guarding schools, kindergartens etc.

No problems with gun safety there, as most kids in Israel grow up
used to seeing guns on the street (in the hands of army personnel
on leave -- every soldier takes his/her gun home when on leave!).
When the message got around to the PLO groups and a couple infiltration
attempts failed, the attacks against schools ceased. Too much of
a risk here: Terrorists and other evildoers don't like risks.

But what does all that teach us?

(A) schools/kindergartens make for very attractive targets for the
deranged gunman as well as for the profit-oriented hostage gangsters
or terrorist group, because:

(1) everybody sane will cave in to the demands of the evildoers
(even somebody as hard-nosed as Golda Meir, may she rest in peace,
said during the Maalot incident, that one does not make politics
on the backs of one's children). Nobody wants to play the principles
game when kids are involved. Kidnapping has thus often resulted
in the paying of ransom demands.

(2) if you crave media attention, as for instance the PLO did in
the 70s, nothing will catch the headlines better than an attack
on a school full of kids.

(B) Now THAT is the underlying "reason" behind each and every
incident that involved killing sprees in schools... from Maalot
to Dunblane to Jonesboro. Only recently the French had a
hostage/barricade incident in a kindergarten: the guy wanted money,
and the French authorities solved that problem very neatly with a
stealth-type approach by one of their special teams and a .357
bullet in the head of the perpetrator, when he refused to
surrender. No follow up imitations occurred in France.

JPFO: Were there any similar incidents in Germany?

SCHILLER: Germany has some of the strictest gun laws this side
of Britain and Japan. And needless to say, they are a continuation
of the Nazi Gun Laws, even using the same wording.

Still, we have a multitude of illegal guns on the streets.
Currently the police estimates that there are ten million legal,
licensed guns and 20 million illegal, in a total population of
less than 80 million people! And we had our school massacres, too:
In the early 60s one incident took place in Cologne involving a
deranged man who, not having access to guns, built himself a
flamethrower. In another incident a few years ago in the vicinity
of Frankfurt, another crazy individual shot his way through a
school with two handguns, and later committed suicide.

Also, prior to the Lockerbie plane bombing (which was only one
item in a whole spree of planned and coordinated terror attacks
luckily foiled by the authorities), German security services
detected in September '88, that a Palestinian splinter group had
made plans for a raid on the Jewish kindergarten in Munich. We
found the photos, ground plans etc. Apparently the planning of
the attack was pretty far along.

So you do not have to be a prophet to foresee, that we will see
more school-shooting incidents in the U.S. or other western
nations, where media attention is focused on these things and
where every incident is replayed second by second umpteen times
on the tube, thereby creating in the minds of certain viewers
examples to follow...

Now, can we stop the media from playing out these scenarios in
full color and gruesome details for hours and hours, again and
again? Certainly not. We in the terrorism research field have
argued for decades that it was exactly the media coverage that
spurred more and each time more violent and extreme terrorist
incidents. Could we stop the media from advertising the terrorist
message? Certainly not.

That is apparently one price we have to pay living in a worldwide
infotainment society. The airplane hijackings in the 70s and 80s
are a case in point.

The only thing we can do is protect possible victims...And laws
written in some books will not achieve that. Never have, never will.
...Enough said. I rest my case.

JPFO: How can our readers and members contact you?

SCHILLER: Our e-mail address is: [e-mail]

or my mailing address:

Dr. David Th. Schiller
VISIER, P.O.Box 1363
D-56373, Nassau, Germany

****************************************************************
Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (JPFO)
Chris W. Stark - Director of Electronic Communications
2874 So. Wentworth Ave.
Milwaukee, WI  53207
Ph. [phone]
Fax [phone]
[e-mail]

Visit our Web Page at: http://www.JPFO.org

STAND UP AND BE COUNTED! IF YOUR NOT A MEMBER OF JPFO, THIS IS NOW
THE TIME TO BECOME A MEMBER.

To become a JPFO member, go to: http://www.jpfo.org/member.htm
There you will see a printable member application, along with
info on membership. If you wish, you can become a member using
our on-line application as well.

MEMBERSHIP IS OPEN TO ALL LAW ABIDING CITIZENS.

"America's Most Aggressive Defender of Firearms Ownership."
****************************************************************
Copyright (c) 1998, JPFO
Republication permitted provided this article & attribution
is left intact in its original state.
****************************************************************

TO SUBSCRIBE TO OUR E-MAIL ALERTS, send an e-mail to:
[e-mail]
in the body of the message, type the word "subscribe"



- -

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

Date: Wed, 27 May 98 18:55:00 -0700
From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: Why Our Children Kill So Easily

From the Vigo-Examiner:

GUEST EDITORIAL

Why Our Children Kill So Easily
by CARL F. WORDEN

During World War II it was discovered that only 15% of all American
soldiers actually fired their small arms directly at the enemy when engaged
in a firelight. The other 85% deliberately fired over the heads of the
enemy or into the dirt in front of them. Only 15% actually indexed their
sights on specific enemy personnel with deliberate precision and pulled the
trigger.

The reason? Whether trained as combat soldiers or not, humans have a
strong, inborn inhibition against killing a fellow human being -- even
when they know that human being is intent upon killing them. Faced with
this unsettling discovery, the military began using desensitization
techniques in combat training, and by the end of the Viet Nam War,
95% of American combat soldiers shot to kill the enemy.

The techniques used to overcome the inhibition to kill involved mental,
rather than physical conditioning. Where soldiers shot at stationary,
bullseye-type targets in WWII, modern soldiers are taught to shoot at
human form targets that instantly pop up and then fall down when the
soldier hits the target. Other techniques used are video enactments
that show human beings engaged in attacking the soldier head on. The
soldier is conditioned to rapidly index and shoot the enemy before
he can get a off shot at him.

Over and over again, these scenarios are played out with chilling
success, finally culminating in a soldier who will kill by pure
conditioning, almost like a machine. These same techniques are now
taught to modern police officers using "shoot -- don't shoot" scenarios
using the same large screens and various videos that present situations
in which the officer must make a split second decision whether to fire
or not -- and at which target.

The lesson to be learned from all this is that by repeated extrinsic
mental conditioning, even the strongest, most innate human inhibitions can
be overcome. Of course, the subconscious mind is still quite cognizant of
the soldier's actions on the battlefield, and this may help to explain why
so many more Viet Nam era veterans suffered such a high rate of Post
Traumatic Stress Disorder and suicide than WWII veterans did. In addition,
this phenomenally successful conditioning to kill was not countered by
resensitization training when Viet Nam veterans were returned to society,
and that may explain why so many Viet Nam veterans returned to commit a
number of heinously violent crimes.

This desensitization to killing is no longer limited to military and
police applications: It is being subliminally taught to society in general,
and to our young in particular, through violent, interactive video games.
It is also being reinforced through repeated viewing of violent television
and movie depictions. Over and over again, society is being inundated with
graphic images of bloody violence and satisfying violent revenge.

Incessantly condition the impressionable adolescent to kill through
grotesquely violent interactive video games, and you have a somewhat
sociopathic youngster who has been conditioned to pull a trigger first
and then consider the emotional consequences later -- just like our
modern, well-trained combat soldiers are trained to do.

The recent spate of school shootings by students are also a manifestation
of this desensitization conditioning. These little murderers are often
quoted as saying they didn't "realize" what they did would really hurt
people. That's not as far-fetched an alibi as it appears on the surface.
These kids have been deluged with movie killings where the same "bad" guys
are killed over and over again. They play interactive video games where
they "kill" the opponent over and over again, and with a few more coins,
they get to kill him again.

Remember, these are often young children, barely over 10 years old,
who have seldom seen a real violent death of another human being.
If it's proven that we can condition adult soldiers to completely
overcome their aversion to kill another human being, how much easier
must it be to condition a child to do the same?

In support of this, consider that guns have been accessible to children
ever since this country was founded, yet children did not begin to bring
these guns to school and use them until -- and get this -- interactive
video technology and superbly mastered special effects in increasingly
more violent movies and other media came into play. Sure, there were
isolated incidents in times past, but nothing to compare to the rash
of school related murders we see happening today.

We don't have more child access to firearms, but we do have children
who have been systematically desensitized to taking a human life,
and reversing that condition represents an undertaking so radical
and invasive that it may well prove impossible to reverse.

http://www.Vigo-Examiner.com
Enjoy a free 90 day trial subscription to The Vigo Examiner.
You will receive one to three of our top stories or editorials
each day. Send your subscription request, and all other
communication to [e-mail].


- -

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

Date: Wed, 27 May 98 18:55:00 -0700
From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: JUST SAY "NO!" TO GUN TAX

NRA-ILA FAX ALERT
11250 Waples Mill Road * Fairfax, VA  22030
Phone: [phone] * Fax: [phone] * [e-mail]

Vol. 5, No. 20
5/22/98

JUST SAY "NO!" TO GUN TAX

For several months, rumors have been circulating as to how the
National Instant Check System (NICS) will be implemented when it goes
on-line this November 30. The NICS is the system that will replace
the Brady Act's original five-day waiting period on the purchase of
handguns from Federal Firearms License (FFL) holders. The Federal
Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has recently announced that there will
be a fee involved for all purchases of firearms from FFL holders,
which they refer to as a "user fee." In simple terms, this would
amount to a tax on your right to keep and bear arms! The original
language of the Brady Act, however, does not call for a fee on this
check. NRA can only assume that the proposals to charge fees -- some
reports put the proposed fees as high as $30.00 -- have been encouraged
by the Clinton/Gore Administration. Additionally, FBI has stated that
they intend to retain firearms transfer information for 18 months.
The current law requires the information be destroyed immediately
once the transaction for the background check has been completed.
In response to these developments, pro-Second Amendment U.S. Rep.
Bob Barr (R-Ga.) has introduced H.R. 3949, which would prohibit any
fee from being charged by FBI in order to run NICS, and require that
firearms transfer information be destroyed within two hours from
receipt of the information. We also anticipate U.S. Senator Ted
Stevens (R-Alaska) will introduce similar legislation in the Senate
very soon. Please call your federal lawmakers immediately at
[phone], and urge your Representative to become a cosponsor of
H.R. 3949, and your Senators to support similar efforts in the Senate.

Currently Representatives Barcia (R-Mich.), Boucher (D-Va.), Graham
(R-S.C.), and Strickland (D-Ohio) have signed on as cosponsors of H.R. 3949.

CSG OPPOSES S. 10

Last week, during the Council of State Governments' (CSG) Spring 1998
National Committee and Task Force Meeting in Phoenix, Arizona, the
Corrections Policy Task Force approved a resolution in opposition to
S. 10, which is Senator Orrin Hatch's Violent and Repeat Juvenile
Offender Act of 1997. The CSG resolution mirrors NRA's serious
concerns regarding several provisions that could affect FFL holders
and the general transfer of firearms.

CLINTON/GORE IMPORT BAN

NRA has heard rumors that BATF is asking firearms distributors who
sell rifles that were affected by the recent import ban on certain
semi-automatics for documentation. The word is that they are looking
for documentation that any affected firearms were acquired from their
suppliers prior to the ban going into effect. We are looking for more
details on this rumor, so if you are a firearms dealer that has been
contacted by BATF about certain imports, please call us at
1-800-392-8683.

A LOOK AT THE STATES

ARIZONA: Good News! Recently, Governor Hull (R) signed House Bill
2041, which establishes right to carry reciprocity with states that
have similar requirements for carry permit issuance. We'll keep you
posted as states are announced!

FLORIDA: Governor Chiles vetoed HB 909, which was right to carry
reciprocity legislation that would have allowed Florida to recognize
out-of-state carry licenses and allowed Florida license holders to
carry for self-protection in certain other states. Members are urged
to support those candidates who support our rights at the polls this
election year -- especially in the race for Governor!

TENNESSEE: Gun owners and sportsmen across Tennessee will no longer
be subjected to a 15-day waiting period on the purchase of handguns.
This solid victory for gun owners became reality on Tuesday, May 19,
when Governor Sundquist (R) signed House Bill 2410. As of November
1, 1998, gun owners will be able to walk into a gun store, fill out
the usual paperwork, wait just seconds for the clerk to check your
background, and then walk out with their new purchase. This will be
done through an instant check system operated by the Tennessee Bureau
of Investigation. Also, prior to the passage of HB 2410, the law
required both dealers and individuals to get a certificate of good
moral character signed by the chief of police or sheriff of their
county and submit it to the Commissioner of Revenue for a permit to
engage in the selling of any firearms, including the sale of
personal firearms to friends and neighbors. The NRA was successful
in having both of these onerous sections deleted. Additionally,
House Bill 2410 eliminated the requirement of reporting secondary
sales of firearms to local authorities. Thanks to the hard work of
fellow gun owners, many friends in the State Legislature, and the
assistance of NRA-ILA, a giant leap has been achieved in restoring
the rights of law-abiding gun owners in Tennessee. House Bill 2410,
was sponsored by Representatives Frank Buck (D-40), H.E. Bittle
(R-14), Chris Newton (R-22), Tre' Hargett (R-97), John Tidwell
(D-74), Doug Jackson (D-69) and Senator David Fowler (R-11). In
addition, an NRA logo license plate has been approved for the state.
There's a catch, though: 500 people must apply for a plate through
the Department of Motor Vehicles prior to July 1, 1999, before the
state will issue the plates. Otherwise, the state will cancel the
special plates. Most importantly, the profits from these sales will
be placed in a special fund of the wildlife resources agency for gun
safety programs.

This information is provided as a service of the National Rifle
Association Institute for Legislative Action, Fairfax, VA.



- -

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

Date: Wed, 27 May 98 18:55:00 -0700
From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: Gun Confiscation Story Updated

- ---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 11:57:31 -0700
From: Ed Wolfe <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

The AP will send out the same story several times as more
data is gathered. The version I sent out yesterday was
one of the earlier versions. This one was available from
the Boston Globe website, but I had assumed they were the
same story.

Here's the updated version for anyone who's interested:

15-year-old charged, father's guns seized after teacher threatened

Associated Press, 05/26/98 18:47

LITTLE EGG HARBOR TOWNSHIP, N.J. (AP) - Skittish after a wave of school
shootings, police arrested a 15-year-old boy and seized more than 20 of
his father's guns after the boy showed a teacher a drawing of someone
being shot, authorities said Tuesday.

The Pinelands Regional High School freshman, whose name wasn't being
released, was charged with making terroristic threats against the
35-year-old teacher Friday.

Fearful that the boy had access to them, police seized the weapons and
more than 100 rounds of ammunition as a precaution. Two AK-47s were
among them, an unidentified police source told The Press of Atlantic
City, but police Detective Robert Knapp denied that Tuesday.

The father, a hunting safety instructor for the state Division of Fish,
Game and Wildlife, had the appropriate ownership documents for the
weapons and was not charged, police said. He cooperated with police,
according to Officer Jeffrey Wilson.

Mayor John Adair defended the police reaction Tuesday, saying it was
pro-active instead of reactive, and appropriate in light of last week's
school shootings in Springfield, Ore., and other recent school attacks.

``It perhaps could have prevented a more serious crime from occurring,''
he said.

Neither the boy's name nor the teacher's name was released.

The teacher told police the boy showed her ``a handwritten drawing of
a person being killed at gunpoint,'' and asked her what she thought of
it, according to police reports.

The drawing depicted a male victim in the crosshairs of a rifle scope
saying ``Help.'' Another figure in the drawing said ``You're dead.''
The boy had had behavior problems in school and ``past incidents of
aggressive behavior,'' Knapp told The Press of Atlantic City.

He was charged because the teacher took the drawing as a threat,
Wilson said.

In addition, the boy had written a fairy tale in his English class
that included a graphic murder, said Tish Steward, a math teacher at
the school who is president of the Pinelands Teachers' Association.

Classmates described the boy as an avid hunter who sometimes wore
camouflage to school and often talked about guns.

``He was always talking about them. He wants to be in the Army,''
said Erica Smith, 14, a fellow freshman.

But students said they never heard him threaten anyone or talk about
killing people.

``He just talked about hunting a lot,'' said Buddy Branscomb, 14,
another freshman.

The school is located in a rural area of southern New Jersey known as
the Pine Barrens, where hunting and fishing are popular pursuits.

``Around here, everyone has a shotgun. It's scary,'' said Marko Ritter,
17, a junior at the school.

After the arrest, police obtained a search warrant from Superior Court
Judge Frank Buczynski Jr. for the boy's home and found the guns. They
were  confiscated to prevent the boy from having access to them and were
still being held Tuesday, police said.

``In a case where someone has made terroristic threats,'' police may
remove weapons or restrict access to them until a judge decides it is
safe to return them, according to Gregory Sakowicz, executive assistant
prosecutor for Ocean County.

``It happens in domestic violence cases all the time,'' Sakowicz said.
``It's an access issue.''

The boy, who was released to his parents, was arraigned Tuesday before
Family Court Judge Barbara Villano in Toms River. He was not suspended
from school, police said.

School officials did not return telephone calls about the case Tuesday.

The Boston Globe
http://www.boston.com/dailynews/wirehtml/146/15_year_old_charged__father_s_guns

- --
Nation In Distress
http://www.involved.com/ewolfe/distress/



- -

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

End of utah-firearms-digest V2 #63
**********************************