ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/utah-firearms/archive/v02.n076

Internet Message Format | 1998-06-22 | 44KB

From: [e-mail] (utah-firearms-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: utah-firearms-digest V2 #76
Reply-To: utah-firearms-digest
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


utah-firearms-digest      Tuesday, June 23 1998      Volume 02 : Number 076




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

Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 14:32:21 -0600
From: "David Sagers" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [Fwd: Drown Moses]

Received: from wvc
    ([204.246.130.34])
    by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Sun, 21 Jun 1998 19:27:55 -0600
Received: from fs1.mainstream.net by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
    id TAA26818; Sun, 21 Jun 1998 19:17:34 -0600
Received: (from smap@localhost) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id VAA07642; Sun, 21 Jun 1998 21:25:52 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 21:25:52 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1) by fs1.mainstream.net via smap (V1.3)
    id sma007601; Sun Jun 21 21:25:27 1998
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Originator: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk
From: larry ball <[e-mail]>
To: Multiple recipients of list <[e-mail]>
Subject: [Fwd: Drown Moses]
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
- --------------B6E28F78E8DD42473BE2783A
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dus-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Forwarded to promote more discussion

- --------------B6E28F78E8DD42473BE2783A
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from imo20.mx.aol.com (imo20.mx.aol.com [198.81.17.42])
    by falcon.inetnebr.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id SAA16568
    for <[e-mail]>; Sun, 21 Jun 1998 18:24:50 -0500 (CDT)
From: [e-mail]
Received: from [e-mail]
    by imo20.mx.aol.com (IMOv14_b1.1) id UBABa04311
    for <[e-mail]>; Sun, 21 Jun 1998 19:24:29 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 19:24:29 EDT
To: [e-mail]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re:  Drown Moses
Content-type: text/plain; charset=3DUS-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Mac sub 85

Larry, your publication of your friend's opposing view is noble.  =
Obviously,
however, he has missed the point (in fact, many points) of the disagreement=

with the NRA leadership that many members are expressing.  As another Life
Member who has not resigned his membership, and who did not vote for or
against either slate, let me respond to several of his statements lest he
thinks that you are a lone voice crying in the wilderness.

Your friend writes: =20
<<You continually take the position that the right to keep and
bear arms is absolute and without restriction.  This is illogical in light =
of
the
other freedoms granted in the Constitution.>> =20

Actually, it is perfectly logical when taken in the context of the entire
document of the Bill of Rights and its companion, the Constitution.  Of =
all
the first ten amendments, the Second Amendment does not specify which =
entity
of government will be permitted to control firearms ownership.  It simply =
and
elegantly says that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.=
 =20
    The First Amendment said only that Congress shall pass no law =
restricting
First Amendment freedoms enumerated therein.  It did not prohibit the =
Courts
or the Executive or the State governments from doing so, although the
mechanism specifying what powers the federal establishment had were =
already
provided for in the Constitution, which did not say that the Executive or =
the
Courts could restrict those freedoms. The other amendments restrict the
ability of the governments and courts to quarter troops, violate due =
process,
seize property, etc., and finally limit the federal governments powers to
those not already reserved to the states or to the people.  Since the =
right of
the people to keep and bear arms had already been enumerated in the Second
Amendment, any action by the federal or state government to diminish or
restrict that right (infringe upon it) is illegal, hence the right IS
absolute.=20

<<Freedom of speech is certainly not without certain constraints. You are =
not
free to write or say things which are not true and damage others.>>

A Washington state supreme court ruling only this month said that the =
First
Amendment protects the right to lie.  In a false advertising case, it =
ruled
that the truth is out there if a person is willing to do the research.  =
Does
lying damage others?  Have not gun owners nationwide been damaged by the =
media
which associates law-abiding citizens with hate groups, criminals, =
traitors,
lunatics?  Is it damaging to blur the distinction between semi-automatic
weapons used by sportsmen and target shooters with full-automatic weapons =
used
by terrorists and the enemies of freedom? =20

<<No freedoms granted in the constitution can be assumed to be absolute
when they damage other people or infringe upon other freedoms>>

First, freedoms were not granted in the Constitution, they were enumerated =
in
the Bill of Rights.  Freedoms came from natural law, and the Creator.  =
Second,
how does my right to own the firearms of my choice for which I pay my =
hard-
earned money and for which I use for my lawful purposes damage or infringe
upon other peoples freedoms?

<<Logical people must assume that the Second Amendment is also not =
absolute.
Mr. Heston and the N.R.A. believe, logically, that the Second Amendment is =
not
absolute and we must accept certain restraints when they are necessary to
prevent damage to other people or their freedoms.>> =20

Logical people must assume no such thing--reference the above arguments.  =
If
the NRA believes that we must accept certain restraints, they have not =
implied
that belief in their editorials or their fund-raising letters.  Has the
leadership lied to us?=20

<<It is not appropriate to attack companies like Midway simply because you
didn't get your way within the N.R.A.>>

I don't believe that the proposal was to attack Midway.  My understanding =
was
that the proposal was to convince Midway to assist our cause by temporarily=

suspending their program.  If I can help convince them to aid our cause to =
get
the NRA leadership back on the right track, I shall.

Finally, like many others, I'm not at odds with the NRA leadership.  I was
supportive of Mr Heston's  position that the Second Amendment is the
cornerstone of all the other freedoms we enjoy.  But I think that enough
questions have been raised for which we haven't received satisfactory =
answers
or explanations that a moratorium on blind automatic support for every NRA
position can no longer be expected from the membership.  Am I an extremist?=
  I
don't think so.  But I think that the new FBI regulations are a direct
extension of the NRA's compromise on insta-check, and I think that the =
ONLY
reason that any government agency wants to keep records of gun purchases =
or
transfers or transactions is to facilitate the ultimate goal of disarming =
the
law-abiding public, which in turn will lead to the loss of the rest of the
freedoms that we haven't lost already.

Thanks for letting me add my two cents


- --------------B6E28F78E8DD42473BE2783A--



- -

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 17:25:05 -0600
From: "David Sagers" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fwd: Re: Clinton Supports Brady

Received: from wvc
    ([204.246.130.34])
    by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Mon, 22 Jun 1998 16:57:58 -0600
Received: from fs1.mainstream.net by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
    id QAA27635; Mon, 22 Jun 1998 16:47:40 -0600
Received: (from smap@localhost) by fs1.mainstream.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id SAA03800; Mon, 22 Jun 1998 18:56:12 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 18:56:12 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost(127.0.0.1) by fs1.mainstream.net via smap (V1.3)
    id sma003599; Mon Jun 22 18:52:38 1998
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Originator: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk
From: larry ball <[e-mail]>
To: Multiple recipients of list <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Clinton Supports Brady
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

Even though I knew this was coming to pass, just to read of it sickens me. =
 Really it
does.  This was brought about by our own beloved NRA.  And just think, =
there are those
in the gun rights fraternity that will do nothing to bring them to heel.  =
"They are
the only thing between us and total deprivation," is their refrain.

Oh really?  REALLY!   The only thing!  Well folkses, I am 61 years old =
just this
month.  It is too young of an age.  I will bet my bottom dollar that I =
will live to
see not only continued rape of the 2nd Amendment, but the final mutulation =
killing of
it.  Wanna bet our politcal champion is right in there all they way =
championing the
cause of "reasonable" regulation of our rights?

Larry Ball
[e-mail]

[e-mail] wrote:

> Our dictator has again joined in the fight for gun prohibition...not to
> mention centralized registration via State and FBI collusion.  Plus more
> fees, restrictions and classes of prohibited categories to infringe upon
> the RKBA.
>
> Criminals, by definition (and by Supreme Court decree) do not have
> to comply.
>
> Anyone out there ever involved in a fist fight at some point of their
> youth?  Will, soon today's kids will forever become a felon WRT to
> firearms ownership for that reason.  Why not add running a stop sign
> to the list! (they will).
>
> I once heard that over half of the "blocked" sales were due to
> administrative errors on the governments part.  Gee did not see that
> statistic anywhere.
>
> And with ten million "block" would we expect to see at a least 5 million
> convictions for committing  a felony?  What's that you say,  the real
> number is less than a dozen?  Let me see, the conviction rate fo
> speeding tickets is several thousand times greater.
>
> Its obvious, the existing laws don't work; therefore, we must need more!
>
> HOPEFULLY, some of you on this list will start investigating Reno's
> "statistics" department, to find out what type of bald-faced lies they
> are conjuring up.  Try certified mail and cite the Freedom of Information=

> Act.  Same for the FBI's NICS.
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
> http://www.abcnews.com/sections/us/DailyNews/bradylaw980622.html
>
> Clinton Calls for Expansion of  Federal Gun Law
>
> "By keeping guns out of the hands of criminals...we have helped cut the
> crime rate to its lowest point in a generation."
>
> -- President Clinton
>
> June 22 -The Brady law blocked some 69,000 handgun purchases in
> 1997--more than half of the them because the would-be gun owner was =
either a
> convicted or indicted felon.
>
> These rejections account for only 2.7 percent of the 2,574,000 applicatio=
ns
> nationwide for handgun sales during the year, the Justice Department's =
Bureau
> of Justice Statistics reported Sunday.
>
> Since the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act became law in February
> 1994, through Dec. 1997, the bureau estimates some 242,000 handgun
> purchases out of 10,356,000 applications have been blocked.
>
> The law was named after former White House Press Secretary James Brady,
> who was wounded in the 1981 assassination attempt on President Ronald
> Reagan.
>
> President Clinton hailed the success of the law in keeping guns out of =
the
> wrong hands, but called for an expansion of the law to bar violent =
juveniles
> from owning guns for life.
>
> "By keeping guns out of the hands of criminals-and putting more police
> in our  communities-we have helped cut the crime rate to its lowest =
point in
> a generation," Clinton said.
>
> Denying Criminals Firearms Felony convictions or indictments topped the =
list
> of reasons for rejections, and accounted for 61.7 percent of last year's =
handgun
> permit denials.  The second most frequent reason for denial was a record =
of
> domestic violence, which was responsible for 11.2 percent, including 9.1
> percent who had misdemeanor domestic violence convictions and 2.1 =
percent
> who were under court orders restraining them from harming or stalking an
> intimate partner or child.
>
> Another 5.9 percent of the denials were for buyers who turned out to be =
fugitives
> from justice.
>
> State law prohibitions accounted for 6.1 percent of the rejections, drug =
addiction
> for 1.6 percent, mental illness for 0.9 percent and local law prohibition=
s for 0.9
> percent.
>
> The remaining 11.7 percent of the denials came from all others barred =
from
> handgun purchases under the Federal Gun Control Act of 1968, including =
illegal
> aliens, juveniles, dishonorably discharged servicemen and people who =
have
> renounced U.S. citizenship.
>
> The estimates were based on a sampling of the chief law enforcement =
officers
> whose agencies conduct the background checks.
>
> New Guidelines for Gun Dealers Beginning this November, pre-purchase
> checks will be required for all firearms-not just handguns-bought from =
federally
>  licensed dealers. The dealers must checks through an automated system
> Justice Department officials promise will be operable by then.
>
> Unless a state has set up an approved permit system, the dealers will =
use
> computers or the telephone to contact the FBI's national criminal =
background
> check system directly or go through a state agency serving as an FBI =
contact
> point.
>
> Last week, Attorney General Janet Reno urged states to do their own =
criminal
> background checks, rather than leave them to the FBI. "No one knows more
> about state records than the states themselves," she said.
>
> About half the states have so far agreed to do their own checks.
>
> Gun dealers will likely pass on the cost of the check to customers. The
> Justice Department wants states to perform the background checks to
>  save money at the FBI and to prevent confusion over different state =
laws.
>
> The FBI plans to charge $13 to $16 per background check to states that =
will
> not do their own.
>
> The Associated Press contributed to this report.
>
> ____________________________________________________________________
> Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=
=3D1





- -

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jun 98 22:06:00 -0700
From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: Major Anti-gun Hysteria on ABC

- ---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 00:20:59 -0700
From: Ed Wolfe
To: [e-mail]

http://www.abcnews.com/sections/us/guns/guns_intro.html

ABC News.com: Armed in America

June 22, 1998
- --
For noncommercial educational use only.
- --

The gun won. He remains in critical condition.

On Thursday night, two men shot an 18-year-old youth to death on a street
corner in Las Vegas.

On Wednesday, 18-year-old Damon Damar Ingram was shot and killed as he
walked his dog on a street in the nation's capitol. His 17-year-old
assailant pumped 10 bullets into Ingram's body. Ingram's parents buried
their son in his cap and gown.

On Tuesday night in Idaho, a State Police officer was shot in the head
and killed. That same night in Baltimore, police found a 52-year-old
man dead in a vacant lot from multiple gunshot wounds to the chest.

Last Sunday, officers arrested 49-year-old Frances Boice in rural
South Dakota. Police say she shot and killed her 51-year-old husband
in upstate New York before fleeing to the heartland.

Welcome to a week in the United States, one of the world's most free
and violent countries. Where people carry guns to protect themselves
from the other people who own somewhere between 200 million and 250
million guns. A recent study found that Americans murder each other
with guns at a rate 19 times higher than any of the 25 richest nations
surveyed. There are plenty of theories why, but few real explanations.

After a particularly shocking killing, several countries have chosen to
ban handguns outright. But that hasn't happened in the United States,
which has a Constitutional protection for gun owners, and a lot of
scared people who want protection in a society that's starting to
mirror its movies. The death toll mounts.

Copyright (c)1998 ABCNEWS and "http://www.starwave.com" Starwave Corporation.



- -

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jun 98 22:06:00 -0700
From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: When the Law Breaks In

- ---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 17:45:48 -0400
From: "Mark A. Smith" <[e-mail]>
To: SNET <[e-mail]>, L & J <[e-mail]>,
    David Rydel <[e-mail]>
Subject: When the Law Breaks In

http://nebonet.com/headhome/dadmisc/lawbreak.htm

WHEN THE LAW BREAKS IN
Added June 17th, 1998

INTRODUCTION

Here are several examples of the jackbooted, gestapo tactics of the
police state in which we now live, as documented in 1995 by the
Washington Times. Read this and mourn for the loss of your freedoms.

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

From the Washington Times
Phone [phone]
National Weekly Edition
April 3-9, 1995

"WHEN THE LAW BREAKS IN..."
by Samuel Francis
(nationally-syndicated columnist)

Most Americans who keep up with the news today know about the atrocities
inflicted by the federal leviathan at Waco and on the family of Randy
Weaver in Idaho. In both cases, federal police deliberately provoked
innocent people in ways that led to the violent deaths of the innocent.
What few Americans know is that such horrors are far from rare.

In January 1994, several defenders of gun rights and civil liberties
wrote to President Clinton detailing some of these horror stories.
Whether he's bothered to reply I don't know, but what he has to say
about the matter is unimportant. What's important is that Americans
understand what is happening -- to them and their country.

On August 25, 1992, the California home of a law-abiding citizen named
Donald Carlson was invaded by agents of the Drug Enforcement
Administration shortly after midnight on the claim that they were
looking for illegal drugs. Mr. Carlson, asleep at the time, thought
robbers had broken in; he dialed 911 and reached for his hand gun. DEA
agents riddled him with bullets; After seven weeks in intensive care,
he survived -- sort of. No drugs were found.

In October the same year, the DEA paid a similar visit to Donald Scott,
also in California, this time bringing along the Los Angeles Sheriff's
Department for extra protection against the dangerous Mr. Scott, also a
law-abiding citizen. Busting into the house while he was asleep, a deputy
sheriff shot Mr. Scott and killed him. Again, no illegal drugs were found.

A year earlier, in September, 1991, a small federal army composed of some
60 agents from the DEA, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF)
the National Guard and the U.S. Forest Service (where, you have to wonder,
were the Boy Scouts and the Little League) arrived in the living rooms of
Mrs. Sina Brush and two neighbors in New Mexico just after dawn. Mrs.
Brush and her daughter were handcuffed in their underwear and forced to
kneel while the American gestapo searched the house for drugs. No drugs
were found.

These aren't the only instances of armed invasions and violent attacks by
federal police. There are other recent cases not mentioned in the letter
to Mr. Clinton.

Last summer, the ATF paid a visit to Harry and Theresa Lumplugh in
Pennsylvania. The ATF needed only 15 to 20 men, armed and masked, to
handle the couple, whom they forced to open safes and hand over private
papers while held at the point of a machine gun. One of America's finest
kicked the Lumplughs' pet cat to death. No charges were brought against
the Lumplughs.

Last year, four ATF agents raided the bedroom of Monique Montgomery at
four in the morning. She reached for a gun and was shot four times and
killed. Nothing illegal was found. In Ohio, the ATF raided the house of
businessman and part-time police officer Louie Katona III, pushing his
pregnant wife against a wall and causing her to miscarry. Nothing illegal
was found.

In almost all of these cases, the feds showed up in the middle of the
night, garbed like Arnold Schwarzenegger in his latest thriller and
proceeded to bully, beat, humiliate, intrude and sometimes wound or kill
the victims they'd selected. In none did any of the victims violate any
law; in several, the police had relied on intelligence known to be
unreliable. In the Scott case, the Ventura County District Attorney's
Office found that the raid was in part motivated by the desire of the
Sheriff's Office to seize Mr. Scott's ranch under federal
asset-forfeiture laws.

Last year, on a TV talk show discussing Waco, I listened to caller after
caller phone in to report mini-Wacos in their own areas that no one else
had ever heard of. Maybe some of them were cranks and made it up. But the
horrors I've just described have to make you wonder if we really live in
the United States anymore. In none of the cases I know about have any of
the federal agents been charged; few have been disciplined; almost none
made the national news.

What can be done about it? I guess "Write your congressman" doesn't quite
cut it, does it? What should be done about it is that the Congress should
forget its "Hundred Days," its "Contract with America," its constitutional
amendments and its happy talk about the "Third Wave." It should find out
who authorized these and similar raids and who committed these atrocities
against law- abiding citizens. It should abolish the agencies responsible,
and it should make certain that the tyrants and murderers in federal
uniform who planned, authorized or committed these crimes are brought to
justice.

"Give me Liberty or Give me Death" WEB SITE



- -

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jun 98 22:06:00 -0700
From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: Gun Critics Gain in Court

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/gunsb.htm

Gun critics make some headway in court

By TED GEST

For gunshot victims and family members trying to recoup their
losses, the $20-billion-plus-a-year American firearms industry
long has seemed a promising target. But over the years,
manufacturers have fended off the assault by arguing that they
can't be held liable under legal doctrines that normally are
invoked against defective products. "When guns fire and kill
someone, they are working perfectly," says law Prof. Andrew
McClurg of the University of Arkansas, who tracks
firearms-liability cases.

Now, gun critics are retooling their theories and scoring a few
victories. Most prominent is a federal lawsuit in Brooklyn, N.Y.,
against the entire firearms industry and its trade associations.
In May, a judge refused to toss out the case, in which 20 victims
or heirs charge that manufacturers are legally negligent by
selling products that they know will make their way into criminals'
hands. Those leading the case are Katina Johnstone, whose husband
was killed in San Francisco by a robber using a stolen Smith &
Wesson revolver, and Freddie Hamilton, whose son was murdered in
New York City with a never-recovered handgun. "It is possible,"
declared Judge Jack Weinstein, "that plaintiffs will be able to
show that a substantial cause for the killings that are at the
heart of this suit is the operation of a large-scale underground
market."

Just as whistleblowers have emerged to provide inside information
against tobacco manufacturers, an affidavit has emerged in the
Johnstone-Hamilton case from a former Smith & Wesson executive
who charges that the Massachusetts-based firm made marketing
decisions with the knowledge that some of its products would be
used in crime.

The other recent breakthrough occurred in a San Francisco case
filed by relatives of four persons killed in a 1993 office-building
massacre. A Nevada pawnshop that sold the gunman an assault pistol
used in the shooting agreed in April to a $150,000 settlement to
family members. The Washington-based Center to Prevent Handgun
Violence, calling the payment the first of its kind, now is pursuing
a claim against the gun's manufacturer, a firm called Intratec.
"This is just the first hole in the dike of the gun industry's
invincibility," says the center's Dennis Henigan. The group is
testing a legal theory akin to the Brooklyn case: that manufacturers
are negligent by producing guns that are attractive mainly to criminals.

Other victims are succeeding with traditional product-liability
arguments. The Georgia-based manufacturer of Glock pistols has
settled several lawsuits alleging that the guns discharged
unintentionally; critics, including police officers, maintain
that models requiring only five pounds of pressure on the trigger
go off far too easily. The handgun-violence center makes similar
charges in a suit pending in California against the Beretta
firearms firm. The group wants Beretta to provide safety devices
with pistols sold for self-defense.

For its part, the firearms industry is treating the lawsuit
barrage as more of an annoyance than a serious threat.
"Manufacturers lose control when their products reach
distributors, let alone retailers and consumers," says Richard
Feldman of the American Shooting Sports Council, an Atlanta-based
industry organization that was sued in the Brooklyn case.
Minimizing the ex-Smith & Wesson official's appearance, Feldman
says that "it isn't exactly a startling revelation" that criminals
use guns that initially may have changed hands legally. He notes
that judges routinely reject lawsuits involving guns, on the
ground that "any tool can be very dangerous when it is misused."

That kind of thinking doesn't faze gun-control advocates. They
believe that arms makers' immunity from liability is likely to
erode, even if it happens at the same, slow pace that has marked
litigation against tobacco manufactuers. "No other product
manufacturers get the luxury of complete immunity from legal
responsibility," says Arkansas Prof. McClurg, who believes that
"negligent marketing" claims have a clear shot at passing muster
in court.

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

Send comments to [e-mail]

Copyright U.S. News & World Report, Inc. All rights reserved.



- -

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jun 98 22:06:00 -0700
From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: Mayors seek solution for gun control

- ---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 12:14:00 -0400
From: "Mark A. Smith" <[e-mail]>
To: SNET <[e-mail]>, PRJ <[e-mail]>,
    L & J <[e-mail]>,
    David Rydel <[e-mail]>
Cc: Ray Southwell <[e-mail]>,
    Norm Olson <[e-mail]>

Maybe the knife industry will be next, then scissors. BTW, it is illegal
in Britain for anyone under 21 to buy scissors. Are we far behind?

http://www.freep.com/news/nw/qguns22.htm

Mayors seek solution for gun control

City leaders won't sue if industry will help

June 22, 1998

BY MELANIE EVERSLEY
Free Press Washington Staff

RENO, Nev. -- The U.S. Conference of Mayors said Sunday it would not sue
gun makers, as earlier hinted, opting instead to try working with the
firearms industry to pass tougher gun laws and end pro-gun advertising.

But Detroit Mayor Dennis Archer warned the gun industry that lawsuits
weren't out of the question.

"I can assure you," Archer told gun industry representatives at the
U.S. Conference of Mayors' annual meeting in Reno, Nev., "if there
is no relief, that you will hear from mayors."

Archer did not specifically say Detroit may file a lawsuit against
gun makers, but he hinted it might not be out of the question.

"I do think it's foreseeable to see individual cities filing lawsuits
because I'm not as optimistic as others might be that the dialogue
that may take place is going to bear any kind of realistic fruit,"
Archer said after the meeting.

Archer spoke after Mayor Edward Rendell of Philadelphia said the
mayors "agreed to hold in abeyance any thought of a lawsuit."
Rendell has taken the lead on the issue within the conference,
a powerful Washington-based lobby of 300 mayors. "If there is going
to be a lawsuit, it makes sense for hundreds of cities to join in
that lawsuit, but then again, let's see where we're going."

The gun issue has escalated nationally in recent weeks with word
that Philadelphia and Chicago, both frustrated in their efforts
to stop gun violence, particularly by and against children, were
considering filing lawsuits against the gun industry.

A lawsuit would mirror the aggressive stand many states have taken
against the tobacco industry to seek reimbursement for tobacco-related
health care costs.

Philadelphia's legal action would have sought financial repayment of
police overtime, health care and other costs associated with firearm
violence. Chicago's suit would have blocked the industry from
advertising that appeals to criminals, such as ads that praise a
weapon's ability to ward off fingerprints.

But instead of suing, the mayors' group will assemble a task force to
work with the gun industry.

The task force would operate for three years and would include mayors,
gun makers, and members of the American Shooting Sports Council, the
National League of Cities, and the National Association of Counties,
Rendell said.

The mayors want the industry to:

* End advertising that convinces people they need guns for safety in the home.

* Support local legislation already passed in Maryland, Virginia and
South Carolina that prevents anyone from making mass purchases of guns.
Such guns are generally sold to young people. The legislation limits
gun purchases to one per month, blocking people from making mass gun
purchases and then selling those guns to minors.

* Help develop ways to make more affordable technology that prevents
anyone but the person fitted with a gun from using it.

The gun task force will issue its first report in January, Rendell said.

Richard Feldman, executive director of the sports council, who attended
the meeting, said while his group does not completely agree with the
mayors on various ways to curb the use of guns, there is common ground.

"Lawsuits cost million of dollars -- they cost millions of dollars for
the cities, if you decide to go that route, they cost millions of dollars
for our industry," he said. "That's millions of dollars that won't be
spent on child safety locks, that won't be spent on new technology."

Melanie Eversley can be reached at 1-202-383-6036.

All content copyright 1998 Detroit Free Press and may not be republished
without permission.



- -

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jun 98 22:06:00 -0700
From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: USNews: Sunset or new dawn: Taking gun makers to court 1/2

Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 13:29:19 -0400
From: "Mark A. Smith" <[e-mail]>
To: SNET <[e-mail]>, PRJ <[e-mail]>,
    L & J <[e-mail]>,
    David Rydel <[e-mail]>
Cc: Ray Southwell <[e-mail]>,
    Norm Olson <[e-mail]>

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/980622/22guns.htm

U.S. News 6/22/98

Childproofing guns
A novel legal strategy focusing on
safety poses a threat to
manufacturers

BY GORDON WITKIN

Before he died, Kenzo Dix wrote an
essay for his ninth-grade English
class that said, "When I pass away, I
want to leave something that people
will remember me by. A gift to the     National Rifle
future from me." Kenzo's mother, Lynn  Association: Its gun
Dix, hopes that gift will be a safer   safety rules include
gun "so there are no more victims."    advice on locking up
That's part of the reason she sued     guns. Other
Beretta U.S.A. Corp., the maker of     childproofing
the semiautomatic pistol that a        precautions are in
schoolmate, apparently unaware a       the Youth Hunter
single bullet remained in the          Safety Quiz.
chamber, used to accidentally kill
Kenzo.                                 Handgun Control Inc.
                                       and the Center to
It has been four years since Kenzo     Prevent Handgun
was killed in Berkeley, Calif., and    Violence: Safety
Lynn Dix is hoping that this week a    rules include
judge might finally clear the way for  instructions on
Beretta to stand trial in an Oakland   taking apart a
courtroom, perhaps as early as July.   handgun to prevent a
If that happens, the case will be      child from using it.
closely watched by all sides: It's     Information is also
rare that suits against gun companies  available on Child
ever get to trial, and Dix's lawyers   Access Prevention
intend to pursue an important new      laws and legal
legal theory--that the gun's design    action against the
is defective because it fails to       gun industry.
incorporate available safety features
that would prevent kids from firing    National Institute
it.                                    of Justice: This
                                       branch of the U.S.
There has been gun news recently that  Department of
seems, on the surface, more            Justice studies law
important. Show business icon          enforcement and
Charlton Heston took over the          public safety. For
presidency of the National Rifle       more on the need for
Association last week, pledging        new gun safety
moderation but telling President       features, read
Clinton, "America doesn't trust you    "Firearms and
with our 21-year-old daughters, and    Violence" or
we sure, Lord, don't trust you with    "Illegal Firearms:
our guns!" And Luke Woodham went on    Access and Use By
trial for killing two students last    Arrestees."
fall at a high school in Pearl, Miss.
But the Dix case--if allowed to go     Beretta U.S.A.
forward--could ultimately be more      Corp.: The venerable
consequential. For years the gun       gun manufacturer
debate has been about restrictions on  (founded in 1526) is
sales of firearms. In recent months,   being sued in an
though, the issue of gun design has    Oakland, Calif.,
moved to the forefront, confounding    court over the
past political alliances and changing  accidental death of
the tenor and substance of the gun     Kenzo Dix, shot by a
debate.                                friend playing with
                                       a Beretta
For gun control groups, the new        semiautomatic
argument--which they hope to showcase  pistol.
in the Dix case--is that gun
companies carry the same burden of     Colt Manufacturing
responsibility as car manufacturers,   Co.: As reported in
which have incorporated seat belts,    U.S. News this week,
air bags, locks, and keys in an        Colt is working with
effort to make their products safer,   the National
to prevent unauthorized use, and, not  Institute of Justice
coincidentally, to ward off lawsuits.  to create a "smart"
But instead, charges Dennis Henigan    gun that can only be
of the Center to Prevent Handgun       used by the owner.
Violence, most gun firms have          Colt's firearms
exhibited a "callous disregard for     safety guidelines
safety, and watched kids die year      compare unsecured
after year and done nothing about      guns to other
it," even though "some safety          household hazards
improvements would involve simple      such as bleach and
mechanical devices."                   charcoal lighter
                                       fluid.
The technology is available; a few
gun companies have added some of       Related U.S. News
those devices, like key-operated       Articles:
internal locks or "loaded-chamber
indicators," which show whether a gun  Again: In
is loaded through a color-coded        Springfield, Ore., a
display or a pop-up pin. Such          familiar school
features might have prevented 31       scene-bloody kids,
percent of the 1,501 accidental        grieving parents, a
shooting deaths in an earlier year,    teen accused of
according to a 1991 General            murder. (6/1/98)
Accounting Office report. Gun safety
advocates further argue that firearms  The children of
should be "personalized" so only       Jonesboro: Horrific
authorized users can operate them,     scenes of urban
through use of technology that         crime are often
permits the gun to fire solely when    attributed to ghetto
held by someone wearing a special      culture. Now, in the
transponder, or identifier.            aftermath of the
                                       ambush at Westside
Beretta's defense. Gun companies       Middle School in
counter that holding a manufacturer    Arkansas, a
responsible for misuse of a product    different question
that works exactly as intended would   is being asked: Is
stand the civil liability system on    there also a
its head. Beretta argues that          virulent culture of
responsibility in the Dix case
belongs with the father who left a     violence in the
loaded gun in a camera bag and the     rural South?
young shooter who ignored basic rules  (4/6/98)
of gun safety. The personalized gun    Prayer circle
technology wasn't available when the   murders: In Paducah,
Dix gun was produced in 1992, says     Ky., heroism,
Beretta, and the weapon in question    forgiveness, and the
actually had a loaded-chamber          search for a motive.
indicator.                             (12/15/97)
[ Continued In Next Message... ]



- -

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jun 98 22:06:00 -0700
From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: USNews: Sunset or new dawn: Taking gun makers to court 2/2

So far gun makers have won most of
the lawsuits alleging widespread       Handgun stealing
liability for injuries caused by       made real easy:
their products, and they still cling   Thousands of guns
to hope the Dix case might be          are stolen straight
dismissed this week. But the legal     from firearms
ground may be shifting along with the  makers, stores -
political ground. Eighty-six percent   even military bases.
of those questioned in a 1996 poll     (6/9/97)
favored legislation requiring new
handguns to be childproof, and recent  Weapons bazaar: How
schoolyard shootings have intensified  surplus American
interest in keeping guns from kids.    arms get into the
Gun control advocates believe that     wrong hands.
even unsuccessful lawsuits have        (12/9/96)
helped promote their cause, since
"the industry didn't invest any money  Can "smart" guns
in personalizing technology until      save many lives? The
lawsuits began to be filed," charges   newest idea for gun
Henigan. The cases are now arriving    control: "smart"
at a faster clip. In October, a trial  pistols that can be
is slated to begin in federal court    fired only by their
in Brooklyn, N.Y., in the case of      owners. (12/2/96)
Hamilton v. Accu-Tek, in which nine
plaintiffs allege that gun
manufacturers produced too many of
their wares, with the result that
guns landed more easily in the hands
of juvenile criminals. Last week, a
spokesman for Chicago Mayor Richard
Daley said the city is considering an
unprecedented suit against gun
manufacturers, and Daley told a press
conference that "the key is to get a
lawsuit whereby the manufacturer is
held liable, just like the smoking
industry." The tobacco wars yield
lessons for the gun wars. One is that
the industry can win repeatedly in
court but end up damaged if just one
case with a compelling legal theory
is successful. "And I have no doubt,"
says Stephen Teret of the Johns
Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and
Research, "that at some point one of
these firearms liability suits is
going to be won by the plaintiffs."

The issue of gun design is arising on
other fronts as well. Late last year,
Massachusetts Attorney General Scott
Harshbarger issued rules requiring
guns sold there to include trigger
locks and load indicators. The rules
were to go into effect in stages this
year, but manufacturers sued in
January, arguing that Harshbarger had
exceeded his authority, and a hearing
on the matter is slated for next
week. And this week, Democratic Rep.
Carolyn McCarthy, whose husband was
fatally shot on a Long Island Rail
Road train in 1993, will introduce
legislation mandating new handgun
safety features, including safety
locks and child-resistant triggers.

While new NRA president Heston struck
familiar don't-tread-on-us themes at
last week's convention in
Philadelphia, some gun makers are
pushing to get on the pro-safety side
of the safety debate. Manufacturers
in 1989 formed the American Shooting
Sports Council to create a voice
separate from that of the NRA. The
group opened a Washington office last
year, and its executive director,
Richard Feldman, orchestrated a White
House event last fall in which
executives from 15 gun manufacturers
shared a podium with President
Clinton to announce they would
voluntarily ship trigger locks with
their firearms. The agreement drew
criticism from several sides. One gun
control group, the Violence Policy
Center, said the lack of federal
standards for the locks made the deal
virtually meaningless. Meanwhile, NRA
Executive Vice President Wayne
LaPierre wrote to gun makers, saying,
"You have helped Clinton to co-opt,
to steal yet another issue. And he
will use it to destroy you." Feldman
says the deal made sense in part
"because an accident prevented is a
lawsuit avoided."

Colt for cops. No one has gone
further--or proved more controversial
within the industry--than Colt's
Manufacturing Co., whose storied
history dates to the early 1800s.
Working with a $500,000 grant from
the National Institute of Justice,
Colt is about to complete work on its
second prototype of a personalized
gun, which uses radio signals that
allow the weapon to recognize and
respond to a transponder worn by the
authorized user. The weapon is
designed for use by police officers;
studies show that 16 percent of
murdered cops are slain with service
weapons wrested from them or a fellow
cop. Gun control groups hope the
technology will be available to
police officers in two to three years
and eventually to civilians.

Colt President Ron Stewart has argued
that gun makers must change their
basic outlook in order to survive.
Writing in last December's American
Firearms Industry, Stewart stated
that the industry's response to the
anti-gun lobby was "pathetically
inadequate" and said manufacturers
must "take the high ground and
pre-empt [the gun control advocates']
next strike," in part by creating a
research and development program to
improve gun safety. "If we can send a
motorized computer to Mars," wrote
Stewart, "then certainly we can
advance our technology to be more
childproof."

For sharply differing reasons then,
both gun control advocates and gun
makers appear at least momentarily to
be pointed in the same direction:
toward a safer gun.


- -

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

End of utah-firearms-digest V2 #76
**********************************