ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/utah-firearms/archive/v02.n145

Internet Message Format | 1999-07-13 | 45KB

From: [e-mail] (utah-firearms-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: utah-firearms-digest V2 #145
Reply-To: utah-firearms-digest
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


utah-firearms-digest     Wednesday, July 14 1999     Volume 02 : Number 145




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

Date: Wed, 07 Jul 1999 14:16:41 -0600
From: "David Sagers" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fwd: great article by the house conservative at  Salonmagazine, Clinto

Received: from wvc
    ([204.246.130.34])
    by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Wed, 07 Jul 1999 09:29:55 -0600
Received: from fs1.mainstream.net by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
    id JAA13460; Wed, 7 Jul 1999 09:09:40 -0600
Received: from  (localhost [127.0.0.1])
    by fs1.mainstream.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA07421;
    Wed, 7 Jul 1999 11:18:58 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 11:18:58 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Originator: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: first-class
From: "Shimm, David" <[e-mail]>
To: Multiple recipients of list <[e-mail]>
Subject: great article by the house conservative at  Salonmagazine, Clinto
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: Anti-Gun-Ban list
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-7
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

What's gun control got to do with it?=20


The 20,000 laws already on the books couldn't stop the Columbine massacre,
and one more won't either, but liberals just don't get that.

- - - - - - - - - - - - -
By David Horowitz=20
July 6, 1999 | The other day I picked up a phone message from a woman
concerning a charity event for homeless youngsters that I was helping
organize in Hollywood. The woman is a liberal, and she said she had found =
a
friend who was willing to volunteer her home for an event we had planned =
for
the children -- then she paused -- "but not if Charlton Heston comes."=20
Then she paused again. "In fact," she said, "none of my friends' homes =
will
be available if Charlton Heston comes." It was unnecessary for her to say,
as she also did under her breath, "They murdered those kids," to alert me =
to
the fact that this was about the Columbine tragedy in Colorado, where two
sociopathic teenagers had barged into a high school and ambushed their
classmates before turning their weapons on themselves.=20
Nor did she have to connect the dots and say that the passions that Heston
provoked as head of the National Rifle Association, which had thwarted the
passage of gun control legislation in the aftermath of these events, was =
the
cause of her friends' determination to shun Charlton Heston and make him a
social pariah.=20
Accustomed as I am to such intolerant reflexes in people who otherwise =
think
of themselves as "liberal," this one caused me to stop and reflect for a
moment on what it had revealed. Consider, dear reader, the people you know
and call your friends. How many individuals could you name whom these
friends would want to bar from a social gathering whose sole purpose was =
to
raise money for homeless kids? O.J. Simpson? Slobodan Milosevic? David =
Duke?

For myself, I don't have a single conservative friend or acquaintance who
would say, "If Barbra Streisand wants to help us raise money for poor =
kids,
I don't want her in my house." (OK, maybe one or two.)
       =09
Charlton Heston is no conservative troglodyte. He is a New Deal Democrat,
the former chairman of the Hollywood committee for the Rev. Martin Luther
King Jr.'s march on Washington, a lifelong champion of civil rights and
artists' rights (he was a staunch defender of the National Endowment for =
the
Arts) and generally a decent, humane and ecumenical soul.=20
Of course, such data is irrelevant in this matter, because the ideological
hatred liberals bear toward Heston has no real-world referrent in terms of
who the man actually is. Even Heston's role as spokesman for the NRA =
doesn't
make their passion any more intelligible to someone outside their
ideological bubble. Do the 3 million mainly lower-middle-class and
working-class members of the NRA want to see children die? Would the
legislation they defeated have indisputably saved those children or others
to come?=20
The fact is that there are 20,000 gun laws already on the books, 17 of =
which
were violated by the Columbine killers. What would one more law accomplish
that the other 20,000 could not? Especially one that would merely mandate
background checks on buyers at gun shows? Is there any evidence that these
shows are the sites of a significant number of criminal purchases or that
such legislation would have any effect on armed crimes?=20
The Brady Bill has been violated on 250,000 occasions, according to police
records, but not a single violator has been punished. Is there any
correlation at all between stringent registration laws and low gun deaths?
Apparently not. A social scientist named John Lott has just published a
study that claims that communities in which citizens are armed have lower
incidences of gun violence than communities where guns are relatively
absent.=20
In places where gun violence has actually been reduced, like New York, =
where
the murder rate has been cut by a phenomenal 60 percent, the reason =
appears
to be aggressive police methods, which have come under fire from many of
these same liberals who think gun control is the answer. Do the people who
hate Chuck Heston adore Rudy Giuliani? Hardly.=20
I do not intend this as an argument for or against the gun legislation =
that
was proposed and that failed in the wake of Columbine. It is merely a case
for sobriety in assessing the issues that make up the dispute. The gun
legislation in question may have been worthy or not. The point is that any
difference it might make is so insignificant that it could not justify the
foam-at-the-mouth response of its proponents or the stigma they have
attached to people, like Heston, who disagree with them about it.=20
Why are liberals so hypocritically bigoted? It's not a question that can =
be
casually dismissed. After all, the conservatives who would shun a Barbra
Streisand make no fetish out of "diversity" the way liberals do, nor do =
they
wave the bloody flag of past witch-hunts whenever they come under attack, =
as
liberals are known to do as well.=20
Moreover, the little auto-da-f=C8 over the possibility that Chuck Heston =
would
materialize at a charity event is no aberrant case. George Stephanopoulos'
recent memoir captures a parallel moment at the very center of the =
political
process. Before impeachment irretrievably embittered the atmosphere of the
Clinton White House, Stephanopoulos and the president were discussing an
open congressional seat and the prospect of an upcoming special election.
"It's Nazi time," Clinton remarked to Stephanopoulos, meaning time to get
back to campaigning against Republicans.
Two years later, at the outset of another campaign, Clinton told Dick
Morris, "You have to understand, Bob Dole is evil, what he wants is evil."
This of a war hero who had played the role of consensus builder in his =
years
as Senate majority leader.=20
  =09
Nor is Clinton alone in his rabid hatred of the Republican opposition. =
Rep.
John Lewis, D-Ga., publicly referred to House Republicans as "Nazis" =
merely
for proposing to keep the expansion of Medicare within the rate of =
inflation
lest the whole system go bankrupt, as a presidential commission indicated =
it
would.=20
Other Democrats, like Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., referred to Republicans as
racist for similar disagreements on budgetary allocations. As in the case =
of
gun control legislation, there is no perceivable connection between the
offenses and the demonization of the offenders by liberals.
Outside the KKK-Farrakhan hate fringe (which embraces bigots on the left =
and
right), there is no conservative analog to this liberal paranoia. Perhaps
there is a Republican officeholder who every now and then enters the
electoral cycle with the war cry "It's commie time," but I certainly =
haven't
met him. The current Clinton security leaks are grave enough to have
generated a hundred Joe McCarthys, but not one has yet appeared.=20
There is simply no analog to the liberal passion of conservative bashing
that has unfairly stained the reputations of figures as disparate as Bork,
Thomas, Gingrich, Barr, Connerly and now DeLay. Conservatives have not =
even
laid a glove on such obvious targets as Barney Frank and Maxine Waters. =
They
tend to think of their opponents as irresponsible or simply misguided. But
they do not treat them as agents of the devil.
But then Republicans are political amateurs. They typically leave a =
business
in the business sector to go fight City Hall over practical matters. They
want to restrain the leviathan that is suffocating enterprise. Or, less
nobly, they want to harness it to some self-interested goal.=20
Liberals have a grander design. Their interest in politics is missionary.
They see government as a means to social redemption, to change the world.
They're not there to tinker with gun control laws. They're there, as =
Hillary
Rodham Clinton put it, "to define what it means to be human in the 21st
century." In the nightmares of NRA supporters, this means to do whatever =
it
takes and to trample over any rights necessary to remove all 240 million
guns from public possession in the quest for a utopia where violence no
longer exists.=20
The reason liberals are so bigoted lies in a vision that has ancestral =
roots
in the Puritan origins of the American new world. They see themselves as
soldiers in the army of the saints -- a vision incomplete without the
counter-army of Satan, the dark adversary corrupting the innocent and
blocking their progress. People like Charlton Heston stand in the way of
their impossible dream. In the fantasies of these liberal Lenins, all the
little dead children killed in drive-bys across America could be walking =
the
safe streets of the 'hood if only the Chuck Hestons of this world would
disappear.=20
salon.com | July 6, 1999




- -

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

Date: Wed, 07 Jul 1999 15:00:12 -0600
From: "David Sagers" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fwd: OT: U.S. Army Soldiers Magless and Muzzled Way Down in Kosovo

Received: from wvc
    ([204.246.130.34])
    by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Wed, 07 Jul 1999 08:37:33 -0600
Received: from fs1.mainstream.net by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
    id IAA13360; Wed, 7 Jul 1999 08:17:17 -0600
Received: from  (localhost [127.0.0.1])
    by fs1.mainstream.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA04846;
    Wed, 7 Jul 1999 10:27:02 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 10:27:02 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Originator: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: first-class
From: Chris Ferris <[e-mail]>
To: Multiple recipients of list <[e-mail]>
Subject: OT: U.S. Army Soldiers Magless and Muzzled Way Down in Kosovo
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

Say it ain't so, Senator Robert "Cool Ranch" Dolito. In an AP photo
printed on page A6 of the July 5, 1999 issue of The Boston Globe, there
you sit, enjoying some G.I. chow at a "holiday barbecue" at Camp
Bondsteel near the southern Kosovo town of Vitina, as highlighted by the
AP photo's accompanying caption. Propped against the near end of the
wooden table at which you and a half-squad of BDU-clad soldiers sit is
one of those Clintonista-feared and Clintonista-hated assault rifles, a
real, bona fide M-16A2 black rifle capable of  celebrating (functional)
diversity either in semi-automatic or full automatic mode. (Well, what
do you know? It actually takes a battle rifle in the hands of an
honorable American of character to save a village! How about that?)

Back to the main point. Missing from the empty well of the M-16A2 rifle
shown in the photograph is a Clintonista-feared and Clintonista-hated
high capacity magazine loaded with 30 rounds of 5.56mm mil spec ball
ammunition! It also appears as if that M-16A2 rifle's muzzle is covered
by a protective plastic cap, ostensibly to prevent WASPs, Roman
Catholics or other assorted "Christian Right" extremists from deciding
to nest, along with a copy of The Ten Commandments, deep inside that
rifle's barrel during Senator "Cool Ranch" Dolito's visit?

Humor aside, reflect back to the date of the infamous, horrific truck
bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon. Recall that over
240 brave U.S. Marines and U.S. Navy corpsmen assigned to the U.S.
Marine unit stationed there lost their lives as a smiling, suicidal
Saracen drove his explosives laden lorry past USMC sentries who, by
policy, were not allowed to have their M-16 rifles' magazine wells
charged with loaded magazines, which heightened state of readiness might
have allowed them to instantaneously chamber live rounds upon detecting
danger and to bring significant firepower to bear on an advancing
terrorist madman.

Would the sentries alone have been able to stop the Beirut truck bomber?
We will never know, will we, because some special assistant to an
assistant bonehead at either the Department of State or the Department
of Defense or at some other stratospheric level within the Pentagon
probably intimidated the local USMC commanding officer into conforming
with stateside, peacetime policies mandating the carriage of unloaded
weapons at a military facility if not on a supervised rifle range.. Hey,
we would not have wanted to anger the Hezbollah Hollow Hee Haw Boys'
Choir, now would we? What would the Hezbollah terrorists active in
Lebanon have thought if camouflage-clad U.S. Marines had actually been
allowed to perform sentry duty at their barracks while carrying weapons
charged with fully loaded magazines? Again, we will never know, will we?

But we sure as heck know now that Senator Bob Dole, a decorated war
hero, is apparently content to sit in southern Kosovo, a confirmed
unsecured combat zone, with U.S. Army soldiers next to whom one unloaded
and oh-so-Clintonally-child-safe M-16A2 rifle rests as a powerful symbol
of all that is wrong with a still superbly trained and highly motivated
U.S. military that has been used worldwide as a political football by
so-called President Clinton and his (liquor) cabinet of (it takes a)
village idiots.

President Clinton, Secretary of Defense Cohen and Senator Dole, if you
should happen to see a copy of this e-mail message, which I sincerely
hope will be forwarded to selected members of Congress who serve on U.S.
House and U.S. Senate Armed Forces Committees, would you please advise
the Chairman of the JCS and commanders in the field that unloaded
personal weapons in combat zones may lead (again) to unloaded coffins
bearing the bodies of soldiers or Marines (killed in action) who should
have been prepared to take up, to chamber a live round in, and then to
fire their already loaded magazine-equipped rifles at a second's notice
in the event of a sudden attack upon their camp or compound?

Our brave soldiers' rifles "magless" and "muzzled" in Kosovo? Shame on
President Clinton, shame on Secretary Cohen, shame on General Clark
(commander of NATO forces in Kosovo) and his boss at the JCS in the
Pentagon, shame on local U.S. Army unit commanders, and some shame, too,
on Senator Dole for sitting by and not demanding unequivocally that
soldiers in his presence be ordered to bear rifles, pistols and other
issued automatic weaponry charged with fully loaded magazines to enable
an immediate, aggressive defense against any enemy's assault on their
position. Combat zones are inherently unsafe. Mandating that our
soldiers (and our Marines) carry unloaded weapons way down in Kosovo is
an unforgivable blunder that must be corrected before lives are lost in
action with hostile forces. Correct this unfortunate situation, now, Mr.
President, Secretary Cohen, General Clark and Senator Dole. Just do it.
Let soldiers be soldiers. Let Marines be Marines. Stop "managing" combat
zones as if they were Clintonized, politically correct Fortune 500
office environments. One telephone call should make "loaded weapons"
happen at Camp Bondsteel and elsewhere, way down in Kosovo. Thank you,
gentlemen, for attending, in prompt fashion, to this important matter.

Respectfully,

Christopher C. Ferris
(Street address deleted)
Nashua NH
[e-mail]



- -

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

Date: Thu, 08 Jul 99 16:14:00 -0700
From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: Gun rights vs. Property rights

At Reams I found a copy of the Salt Lake Valley News, East Valley
News Edition, Vol. 3-10 May 31, 1999 -- June 14, 1999 with an
editorial that calls for a response. The publisher is Kim Folsom.
Message Center: 493-7880, Fax [phone]. Apparently no Web or email
presence. Any takers?

Scott Bergeson
[e-mail]

Editorial: Gun rights vs. Property rights

Recently the Salt Lake Valley News received a press release from
GO Utah which is an organization that says it is, "Utah's
Uncompromising, Independent Gu Rights Network, No Compromise, No
Retreat, No Surrender, Not Now, Not Ever." This is kind of talk
you may have heard at the Alamo or maybe from those two teenagers
that killed their classmates in Colorado. I worry about any
organization that believes the NRA is week in its approach.

This is not the time to take sides, but to use our logic. Yes the
rights of gun owners could be threatened by public sentiment about
recent shootings. Something should be done. We should try to find
out what will solve the problem and put those measures into action.
I agree that restrictions may not be the answer but what is? We
need to keep guns out of places guns should not be anyway. You may
have the right to carry a gun but not at church, or at school or
in private businesses and homes where your gun is not welcome.
Property rights are more important than gun rights.

Authorities should have access to all information that would have a
bearing on a person's ability to be responsible with a firearm. Mental
problems that would impact this ability or prior violent criminal
behavior should be accessible.


If you have contrasting opinions send them to
Salt Lake Valley News
Box 520905
Salt Lake City, Utah 84152-0905.



- -

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

Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 17:07:35 -0600
From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fw: Alert; Range protection

- --------- Forwarded message ----------

Dear Marksmen and Interested Shooters:

    I have attached an anouncement of the public hearings which will take
    place this month (July 1999) on the proposed destruction of the
Tooele
    Army Depot 30 position military range on the far southwest corner of
    the Depot.  Your immediate action is needed.  Please write comments
    opposing the destruction and closure of this range, and plan on
    attending the July 14, and the July 29, 1999 public meetings.  Your
    support is urgently needed.

Elwood Powell
President
Utah State Rifle & Pistol Association

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

Important Meetings Wednesday, July 14, 1999 and Thursday, July 29, 1999
at Tooele

There is a superb rifle range at the Tooele Army Depot. It is fully
developed with 30 firing points at 200 and 300 yards and full target pit
facilities. It is designed so that firing points could be added at 600
yards.

The Army intends to destroy this range rather than turn it over to Tooele
County for future use. Reportedly this is based on environmental issues.

With the rapid population growth in Utah it is harder and harder to find
safe places to shoot. It is nearly impossible to acquire suitable land to
build new ranges anywhere near population centers. Rapid growth in the
Tooele area and Eagle Mountain makes preservation of this range vitally
important. Preserving this range will ensure a safe facility is available
for shooters so they will not be tempted to use open areas that may
inadvertently endanger people or livestock.

There will be a public meeting Wed. July 14, 1999 at 9:30 AM in Building
7
at the Tooele Army Depot. This is a quarterly meeting of the TAD
Restoration Advisory Board/Technical Review Committee. They will "review
environmental projects, increase community awareness and assure that the
interest of the community is addressed during the decision making
process."
For more information contact Larry McFarland, TEAD Environmental
Management Division [phone]; or Randi Nelson, Kleinfelder
Community Relations Coordinator. [phone].

The public comment period on the proposed plan of destruction is June 28
to July 28, 1999. There is an another public meeting scheduled for July
29, 1999 at 7:00 p.m. at the Tooele County Courthouse, Tooele, Utah.
Written comments should be sent to Larry McFarland/SDSTE-IRE,
Environmental Management Division, Tooele Army Depot, Building T8,
Tooele, Utah 84074-5000.

You need to let these people know that preservation of this range
facility
is very important to the citizens of the community. Tax dollars paid for
the facility and if necessary more taxpayer funds should be spent to
preserve it rather than closing it. Options such as only allowing use of
a
smaller pistol type range nearby are not acceptable.

Please attend the meeting if at all possible, dress appropriately and be
polite. If you cannot make the meeting, then call the numbers above to
express your concerns. If you live in Tooele, contact Representative Ron
Allen, Senator Jim Gowan and also the Tooele County Commissioners. and
ask them to formally request that this range be preserved.

- ---END FORWARDED MESSAGE---

==================================================================
Charles C. Hardy
<[e-mail]>







___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.

- -

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

Date: Sat, 10 Jul 99 09:47:00 -0700
From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: FW: ALERT: The Treachery Of Orrin Hatch

- -----
To: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 20:30:58 -0600
Subject: FW: ALERT: The Treachery Of Orrin Hatch
From: "Jim Dexter" <[e-mail]>

Sen Smith has announced he's leaving the GOP for a third party. I hope he
picks us.
- -------------------------------------------------

Attention Utah Gun Owners: Betrayal in the Beehive State!

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

(July 9, 1999) -- Your Senator, Orrin Hatch, is at it again.

In May, Senator Hatch helped push Clinton's gun ban agenda through
the Senate and then voted for S. 254, a bill that was replete with
gun bans and gun owner registration.

That was bad enough.  But now he's gone one step further.  Senator
Hatch is avidly working to send this bill to President Clinton.  But
thankfully, a pro-gun Senator from New Hampshire has placed some
procedural roadblocks in the way of this anti-gun bill.

That Senator is Bob Smith (R-NH), who is using every parliamentary
maneuver imaginable to keep Clinton's anti-gun crime bill bottled
up, and has placed a "hold" on the juvenile crime legislation. A
"hold" is a parliamentary procedure that can indefinitely delay
unconstitutional legislation-- as long as the leadership is willing
to honor the "hold."

Unfortunately, Senator Orrin Hatch does not agree with Sen. Smith.
And that presents a problem for gun owners.  Sen. Hatch, as the
Judiciary Committee Chairman, is one of the most powerful men in the
U.S. Senate.  In a one-on-one battle between Senators Smith and
Hatch, the Judiciary Committee Chairman is going to win.

And that's why your help is needed immediately.

It is imperative that Sen. Hatch hear a huge outcry from the
grassroots in his state.  He needs to know that folks like yourself
don't want this anti-gun legislation going to the President's desk.

ACTION:  Please mail or fax the letter below, and encourage your
family members and friends to do the same.  You can contact Senator
Hatch at:

Office Phone:   [phone]
Office Fax:    [phone]
Judiciary Com. Phone:   [phone]
Judiciary Com. Fax:    [phone]
Toll-free phone:  [phone]
E-mail:   [e-mail]
Address:   Sen. Orrin Hatch, SR-131 Russell SOB, Washington, DC
20510-4402


- ----------------- Clip-n-Send --------------------

Dear Sen. Hatch,

I was disappointed to see that you voted for the horrendous juvenile
injustice bill in May (S. 254).  All the gun control proposals that
you voted for will do NOTHING to stop crime, and they are all
infringements of the rights guaranteed in the 2nd Amendment!

I urge you, in the strongest possible terms, to undo the damage
that's already been done.

I was also disappointed to hear that as our nation was getting ready
to celebrate Independence Day, the Republican leadership in the
Senate (which of course, includes you) was saying they were going to
"push forward" with this juvenile injustice bill, even though
Senator Bob Smith has a "hold" on this awful legislation.

The Washington Times (July 3, 1999) reports that the Republican
leadership wants to "appoint Senate conferees despite Mr. Smith's
threat [to filibuster]."

Senator Smith is, quite frankly, doing the job you guys should be
doing.  You should be supporting him, not opposing him.  The "hold"
that Smith has placed on this terrible legislation is exactly the
kind of leadership that I am asking you to provide.

I do not want ANY of the anti-gun provisions in S. 254 going to the
President's desk.  If they do, I will know that you have betrayed
the gun owners of your state and of this great nation.  After all,
you have the power, as the Judiciary Committee Chairman, to kill any
such legislation that comes out of your committee.

Don't bother telling me that the Democrats might retaliate by
offering their anti-gun provisions as amendments to other bills.
Let them try.  If they do attempt such a plan, then why don't you
adopt the House strategy that was so effective in killing gun
control in that chamber?

The House leadership encouraged truly pro-gun amendments to be
offered to their juvenile crime bill.  An amendment allowing D.C.
residents to own guns and another amendment partially repealing the
Brady law were more than the anti-gun Democrats could bear.  These
pro-gun provisions forced the anti-gun zealots in the House to VOTE
AGAINST H.R. 2122, the anti-gun juvenile bill.  As you know, the
House passed a separate juvenile bill that focused more on
"cultural" solutions to crime, rather than gun control.

Please learn from the successes of the House leadership.

I hope that you will honor Senator Smith's hold, and I hope that you
will keep any of the anti-gun provisions from S. 254 from ever going
to the President's desk.  In short, it is my wish that you work
tirelessly to bury this legislation.

This issue is very important to me.  Thank you.

Sincerely,


**************
Did someone else forward this to you? To be certain of getting up to
date information, please consider subscribing to the GOA E-Mail
Alert Network directly. There is no cost or obligation, and the
volume of mail is quite low. To subscribe, simply send a message to
[e-mail] and include the state in which you live, in
either the subject or the body. To unsubscribe, reply to any alert
and ask to be removed.


- -

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

Date: Tue, 13 Jul 99 10:50:00 -0700
From: [e-mail] (SCOTT BERGESON)
Subject: FW: Fuehrer Gore and Biometric Gun Licenses

- ----------
I doubt anyone on this list would consider voting for OwlGore, but this will
define the terms of the debate....

http://www.infobeat.com/stories/cgi/story.cgi?id=2560261526-711

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

01:37 AM ET 07/12/99

Gore To Unveil Anti-Crime Agenda
By KAREN GULLO
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) _ Vice President Al Gore is proposing an anti-crime
agenda that includes photo licenses for all new handgun owners, a
ban on cheap handguns, increased spending on police training and a
constitutional amendment for victims' rights, The Associated Press
has learned.

In one of his first major pronouncements since kicking off his
presidential campaign last month, Gore will propose sweeping
changes in the criminal justice system designed to get tough on
criminals.

It includes a new policy that includes more federal money for the
nation's court system and a requirement that criminal defendants
pledge to get off drugs if they want to stay out of jail.

The vice president, the front-runner for the Democratic presidential
nomination, was to announce the proposals in a speech today at the
headquarters of the Boston police department, said sources familiar
with his plans who spoke on condition of anonymity.

While many specifics of the agenda, including how much it will cost,
were not available, the most far-reaching proposals deal with gun
control. School shootings this year in Littleton, Colo., and Conyers,
Ga., have turned gun control into a major issue in the 2000
presidential campaign.

Gore wants every new gun owner to have a photo license. At present
there is no federal requirement for gun owners to carry licenses.

Cheap, easily concealed handguns, known as "junk guns" or
"Saturday night specials," would be banned under Gore's proposal.

The junk gun industry traces its roots to a crackdown on handguns
that followed the June 1968 assassination of Sen. Robert Kennedy
by Sirhan Sirhan, who used a European-made .22-caliber revolver.

Until then, most cheap handguns sold in the United States were
made overseas. Congress then banned the import of such weapons
but did not outlaw their manufacture in this country.

Under current federal law, semiautomatic rifles equipped with
detachable magazines and certain other features are banned.
Similar guidelines are imposed on handguns and shotguns.

Gore also wants tougher penalties for gun trafficking.

The vice president has already said he supports raising the age
for handgun possession from 18 to 21; barring juveniles from
possessing assault weapons or large-capacity ammunition clips;
imposing new penalties for adults who sell guns to minors; and
requiring safety locks on guns.

Whether Gore's new gun-control proposals would be approved by
Congress is questionable. The vice president cast a tie-breaking
vote in May when the Senate passed legislation expanding a system
of background checks on firearms purchases so they would cover
all such buys at gun shows and pawnshops.

His campaign hoped that the moment of drama would add momentum
to his campaign. But political squabbling between Democrats and
Republicans helped kill a House gun-control bill in June.

Bill Bradley, Gore's only announced opponent for the Democratic
presidential nomination, has put forth his own gun-control plan,
including a proposal that all handguns be registered and a ban on
the manufacture and sale of cheap handguns.

Gore's anti-crime package includes a "Stay Clean to Stay Out"
policy that says defendants in drug-related crimes who are
awaiting trial must get off drugs to stay out of jail.

Criminals on parole also would have to stay off drugs to stay
out of jail, under the proposed policy.

Ever the technology buff, Gore would make increasing use of
computers in law enforcement, investing in software that community
police could use to map and target high-crime areas.

Other features of the anti-crime package include establishment
of "gang-free zones," more aid for professional development
and retraining of police officers and increased spending on
after-school programs for youths and anti-drug efforts.




- -

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

Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 16:29:17 -0600
From: "David Sagers" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Interesting thoughts

I am talking to every liberal friend I have.  I tell them I don't care=20
whether they shoot or don't, own a gun or don't, but that it is time for =
them=20
to realize the shooters have had about all they will take.  I politely =
tell=20
them this is not about sporting purposes or hunting, it is about a =
basic=20
Constitutional liberty.  I ask them if they feel so strongly about=20
registration and the resulting confiscation that they are willing to =
declare=20
millions of Americans felons, because that is what will happen when we =
don't=20
comply.  I also ask if they are willing to endure a long and bloody =
guerilla=20
civil war that will make Northern Ireland, Yugoslavia or Lebanon look like =
a=20
picnic, because once I am a felon, I really have nothing left to lose.  =
I=20
point out that if just ten per cent of the registered hunters decided =
to=20
resist it would put about 1.5 million armed citizens on the line.  I =
tell=20
them that we have been willing to play by the political rules, even =
thought=20
we have have lost every round, so long as the Second Amendment was there =
as a=20
final check.  However, registration always leads to confiscation, and =
that=20
will certainly lead to war.   Lautenburg is registration, and it is time =
for=20
them to decide how far they want to go.

I am not confrontational.  I tell them it is my sole intent to prevent =
what=20
will surely happen if they continue in their ignorance of shooters and =
their=20
motives.   I ask them to consider the following:  would they stand still =
for=20
an usurpation of the First Amendment?   If not, then do not expect =
millions=20
of us to stand by while they take the Second.  I tell them this is like=20
America in the 1850's with neither side understanding the other enough =
to=20
avoid the civil war.  Clearly, the left may have an agenda, or it may =
be=20
ignorance, but from now on, I do not disguise the fact that we are going =
to=20
fight this, first in the legislature, then in the courts, and finally in =
the=20
streets if neccesary.  We can argue about the amount of welfare, or where =
the=20
next road will be built, but there is no arguing on the destruction of =
the=20
Constitution.

Surprisingly, this quiet little talk has got more of them to think than=20
anything else I have ever argued with them.   No one has ever told them =
this=20
is what will happen.  No one ever calculated a few numbers (10 % of =
hunters,=20
for example) and they never once considered the ramifications fo what =
would=20
happen if the armed citizenry decided to resist with force in order to =
keep=20
our liberty and be left alone.

Note:  I NEVER advocate revolution, I never advocate overthrow of the =
gov't,=20
but I do stress that for millions, the idea that the majority vote can =
take=20
away a basic constitutional liberty is not acceptable  for us.  I tell =
them I=20
am scared to death because for the first time ever, I am beginning to see =
no=20
way out except this end.    I travel a lot in my job, and I hear this =
from=20
even top executives now.  When they are talking like this, you can be sure =
it=20
is on more than a few peoples' minds.   So, rather than try to convince =
the=20
media, I am trying one on one to make our case and to warn of the=20
consequences. =20

So long as the other side sees no teeth, hears no objections and feels =
no=20
restraint, you can be sure they will keep coming.   They need to hear =
blunt,=20
not boastful or inflammatory, talk from everyone in the movement, and I =
mean=20
from all of us.  They need to understand these votes do have consequences =
and=20
that millions of Americans, other than right wing radical militias,=20
anarchists and the like fringe elements, are seriously contemplating =
the=20
exact point the reason the Second was put in the bill rights will come=20
needed.   Jefferson's quote about the Second just lying there until it =
is=20
needed is not a bad one to keep on hand, either.

Some will take these words as proof that more control is needed.  =
However,=20
for the first time, at least some of my liberal friends have some =
serious=20
evaluating of their policies going on.   I believe it is now time for all =
of=20

us to politely start drawing that line in the sand.  For years, we have =
all=20
debated when it is theoretically appropriate for armed resistance to =
begin.  =20
It varies, but the concensus in my discussions over the years has always =
been=20
"Registration and then confiscation".   OK, we are almost there.  Does =
the=20
other side really understand what these concepts mean to us?  Do they have =
a=20
clue what the consequences will be if they keep it up?  If they don't, it =
is=20
because they can marginalize the extremes of our group, but only if =
they=20
don't hear this from the mainstream.   It is one thing if a Rambo in =
fatigues=20
is yelling this, and something else when the local executives, business=20
leaders, clergy and educators and basic citizenry are quietly, firmly =
telling=20
them that this couse of action, if unchecked, will lead to civil war.  =
King=20
George III didn't really understand the ramifications of a gun confiscation=
=20
raid on Lexington.  Lets make sure our opponents are fully aware where =
that=20
road leads.

Scott Harmon

- -

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

Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 09:06:01 -0600
From: "David Sagers" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fwd: Claire Wolf - Carty slugs it out with Compromisin' Sam

Carty slugs it out with Compromisin' Sam=20
=A9 1999 Claire Wolfe

This is embarrassing, and you probably won't believe it anyway.=20
But our little mid-nowhere town of Hardyville has one political=20
throwback. This guy actually thinks that the way to get smaller=20
government is to vote for bigger government.

That's right: He thinks you get smaller government by voting, year=20
after year, for bigger, more powerful government. I know. It=20
sounds too crazy for anyone to credit, but there it is.=20

He calls it "compromise." And we call him "Compromisin' Sam."=20

Most of us ignore him and go on about our business. After all,=20
there's room in the world for all kinds. But there's one guy who=20
just can't resist getting in Sam's face. Carty -- true blue, retired=20
military, Jesse Ventura lookalike -- gets on Sam every time Sam=20
gets into town. They were at it this week, as they ran into each=20
other near the Statue of the Drunken Cowboy.=20

A crowd gathered as Carty barked, "If you don't stand for=20
something, you'll fall for anything."=20

Sam spluttered, "You people gotta quit being so pie-in-the-sky, if=20
you want to get anything done. You look at what you can get, and=20
what you can't, then you accept reality. You compromise."=20

"I'll compromise," said Carty. "On tactics. But the minute you=20
compromise on principle, you've not only lost the battle but lost=20
your a--."=20

"But you're gonna lose it, anyway, standing around saying, 'We=20
won't bargain. We have to have everything our own way.'"=20

"OK. I'll compromise, then. Tell you what: There are 20,000 gun=20
laws in the country and every single one violates the Second=20
Amendment. I want 'em all gone tomorrow. But just to show you I=20
can compromise, I'll settle for having 10,000 of them repealed in=20
the next five years -- and I'll even let Charles Schumer and Dianne=20
Feinstein choose which 10,000. There's your compromise. See?"=20

"That's ridiculous."=20

"Is it? But it's not ridiculous to always do half of what the other=20
guys want? Maybe you and your pals can tell me how come=20
compromise means we only move in their direction instead of=20
them movin' in ours?"=20

Nat Lyons chipped in, "I think I know. I once went down to the=20
Territorial Capital, thinking I might get with the big gun-rights=20
lobby group down there. You know what? They were sittin'=20
around and one guy was sayin', 'Well, we'd really like to have this.'=20
Then everybody else would go, 'Naw, the legislature'll never let us=20
have that.' So then they'd try to figure out what they could get, and=20
that's all they'd ask for. So 'course, the legislature knew they'd take=20
even less. I mean, can you picture the Teamsters starting out=20
saying, 'Well, we can't ask for that 'cause General Motors won't let=20
us have it'?"=20

"It figures," Carty nodded. "I've heard they do that in D.C., too.=20
One guy who knows told me -- on this new gun-control bill they're=20
still tryin' to get passed -- a gun-rights lobbyist was going to=20
senators and begging them to vote for it, the whole time his big=20
famous group was publicly yellin' about how bad it was. I believed=20
it, because the guy was using the group's old line, 'But if you don't=20
vote for this, you could get something worse.' Where have I heard=20
that before?"=20

"Have you heard about this Bob Smith guy?" Grouchy asked.=20
"He's not like that. He's up there in the Senate right now, stopping=20
that gun bill from getting into the conference committee. Now,=20
there's a guy who's like the Founding Fathers."=20

"Yeah," Carty scoffed: "But you know why Mr. Senator Smith's=20
putting on that big show -- I mean, aside from trying to impress=20
people who want him to run for president in a third-party?"=20

"Why?"=20

"Because -- and I'm tellin' you his own words, now -- because he=20
wants 'the weaker gun control provisions.' -- House version instead=20
the Senate version. This dude's no hero, takin' a big stand to save=20
the Second Amendment. He's just gun-grabber 'lite.' Then he goes=20
around on talk shows, sayin' he doesn't want any gun control.=20
[Male bovine byproduct.] Don't get me wrong, he's better than the=20
rest of those [bearers of the bar sinister]. I wish more of 'em had=20
his guts. But don't go all starry-eyed. He ain't your savior."=20

Compromisin' Sam nodded. "That Smith understands reality. You=20
can't buck public opinion."=20

"[Homonym of buck] public opinion," snarled Carty. "I'm talking=20
about rights."=20

"You can talk about rights all you want to," Sam says, "but that=20
isn't gonna get you anywhere."=20

"So where've we been getting with your [unfavored in the eyes of=20
the deity] compromisers?" Carty countered. "Have we gotten some=20
gun-rights back with the NRA making 'reasonable compromises'?=20
Have your pet Republicans stopped us from getting national ID?=20
Have they made government smaller? Got rid of the IRS? What?=20
Tell me."=20

"They've kept things from getting as bad as they could have," Sam=20
insisted.=20

"Look, you [child of a politician], things are getting that bad,=20
anyway! You expect me to be grateful because -- thanks to your=20
compromising pals -- it'll take 10 years for us to become complete=20
slaves instead of six? Or 20 years instead of 12? You want me to=20
tell you exactly how grateful that makes me? Let's just get it over=20
with. Let's have it now, right out in the open where we can fight it.=20
The only thing your compromising friends are doing is numbing us=20
down so we'll get used to it and learn to take it."=20

"But if we just support--"=20

"You do what you want, bud. But one thing you can stop doing,=20
right now -- and that's asking me to help you and your political=20
pals steer on down the road to tyranny. I don't care whether you're=20
going fast or slow. Here's the fact. I ain't goin' there. So don't=20
waste your time trying to tell me why George Jr. or a new tax or a=20
'compromise bill' or some other politician who says one thing and=20
votes the opposite deserves my support. Those guys are all going=20
the same direction.=20

"See that road over there? Hardyville Main Street? It runs in the=20
exact opposite way. Some of the people on it are usin' sports cars=20
and some are usin' 18-wheelers and a bunch more are towin' horse=20
trailers. But not one of 'em's goin' your way. We're goin' toward=20
freedom -- not away from it -- no matter how we have to get=20
there.=20

"You go wherever you want, Sam. And have a nice trip. But when=20
you find your pals have stranded you in the sagebrush with=20
nothing but a broken down old political wreck, and you're dying of=20
thirst for freedom and can't get a single drop, don't expect anybody=20
to ride to your rescue. You knew where you were heading when=20
you set off."=20
_______
NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this=20
material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed=20
a prior interest in receiving the included information for research=20
and educational purposes.

- -

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

End of utah-firearms-digest V2 #145
***********************************