ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/utah-firearms/archive/v02.n190

Internet Message Format | 2000-05-23 | 41KB

From: [e-mail] (utah-firearms-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: utah-firearms-digest V2 #190
Reply-To: utah-firearms-digest
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


utah-firearms-digest      Wednesday, May 24 2000      Volume 02 : Number 190




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

Date: Sat, 6 May 2000 23:28:44 -0600
From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Janalee on Take2 Sunday Morning

Janalee Tobias of Women Against Gun Control taped a session of "Take2
With Rod Decker" tonight after the GOP State Convention.  It is scheduled
to air tomorrow (Sunday) morning at 10:30 am.  Sorry for the late notice
but I just found out.

The anti-gun woman she debated on the show apparantly made a number of
blatantly false statements which Janalee challanged and which Decker said
he'd check up on.  It may be worthwile for those who see the show to take
a moment to call the Take2 number (I trust it will air on the show) and
encourage Decker to follow through with getting--AND THEN REPORTING--the
real facts of the matters discussed.

For any who may be interested, today's Utah State GOP convention was full
of interesting twists, turns, and results.  If no one beats me to it,
I'll try to get out a more complete report in a couple days when I'm
better rested.  Here are some hightlights,

1CD Hansen was unchallanged.
2CD Cook and Derek Smith face off in a primary.  Jeff Wright was quickly
eliminated on first ballot.
3CD Cannon easily avoided a primary in his race.

Senate Seat:  After a number of dirty tricks on the part of SL County in
removing certain delegates and replacing them with others, and with Rob
Bishop pushing for acceptance of a potentially tainted ballott which the
convention delegates simply did not want to take time to re-vote on under
more controlled conditions, Hatch avoided a primary with Greg Hawkins by
about 55 votes out of some 3500 cast-- ~61.5% to 48.5%.  Look for the
Juvinille (in)Justice Bill to come charging out of committee with all
anti-gun provisions intact any day now.

State Attorney General:  Mylar and Shurtleff face a primary.
State Treasurer and Auditor were uncontested and went to the incumbants.

Governor's race:  Apparantly being scared by poll numbers, Leavitt
YESTERDAY signed an executive order authorizing State lawsuits against
the feds over road and wilderness issues.  State GOP and Convention
Chairman Rob Bishop twice refused to remove Leavitt's name from the
ballot for being in direct, open and flagrant violation of GOP State
Bylaw # 8 requiring all Statewide and Federal Candidates to file a
written disclosure with the party 30 days prior to the convention
declaring either their full support for the party platform or listing any
areas of disagreement.  Best information is that as of yesterday, Leavitt
had failed to file this disclosure.  The majority of delegates agreed
with Rob on this one.  As at last year's State Convention, Leavitt was
loudly and roundly booed and heckled during his appearances.  Glen Davis,
who to the best of my knowledge did not have a formal presence at any
county conventions and mailed out only a single 4 page platform, handily
forced a primary once the other challangers were eliminated during
multiple ballots.  Final results were roughly 53% Leavitt, 47% Davis.  In
what may prove to be a stroke of genius on somebody's part, Davis
selected Greg Hawkins to be his Lt. Gov running mate.  Leavitt and Bishop
were clearly unhappy, though Leavitt did promise to engage in debates.  I
will be quite happy if SLCo and State GOP officials end up rueing the day
they engaged in the dirty trick to eliminate Hawkins from the Senate
primary.

Thank you to those of you who participated and assisted and help make
some of these victories possible.

As always with these things, it was a long day and the numbers dimished
for the final round of votes.  If the info I received on vote totals
during the day is at all accurate, it would appear that Conservative
delegates left in nearly equal numbers as the NEA types.  I sincerely
hope that in the future, conservatives will be dedicated not only to
attending their caucas meetings with friends and getting elected
delegates, but will also make whatever schedule adjustments are needed to
stay at convention until final votes are cast and announced AND will be
willing to support open and proper debate and demand that the rules be
upheld throughout the day.  Far too many delegates allow every argument
for "expediancy" from the chair  to cut off debate, adopt rules that
limit our ability to be heard, or to refuse taking time for a fair and
unbiased re-vote when needed.

We had some small successes today.  But we've got a long way to go and we
need every pro-gun/conservative person we can find to help us.  Delegates
have got to show up to meetings committed to taking the time to do things
right even if it does mean being there "until Tuesday."  They have got to
be willing to challange and overrule the chair when he is out of line.
Like minded non-delegates need to show up to assist with leafletting,
manning booths, etc.  I believe some of the success we had today was due
to the help of a few delegates and non-delegates alike who got "Delegate
Guides" "UTGOA Candidate Ratings" "Hatch's Gun Record" and "Leavitt's Gun
Record" flyers into the hands of the majority of delegates.  It was
amazing the difference 15 or so organized people made at this convention
vs 5 or 6 at previous conventions I've attended.  I see no reason why
that number isn't closer to 150 organized people at next year's
organizing convention.

Please, plan now to attend the ENTIRE organizing convention next year.
Honestly, I plan to spend from 6:00 am until past midnight at these
conventions.  If we get out before that (and we do), I consider it "found
time."  Start thinking of good, credible, conservatives to run for party
office.  If you are thinking of running for some office, please make sure
you have some credetials of service to the party or her candidates.  If
you don't have any yet, get some by actively working on a campaign or by
finding a volunteer position within the party.  Also. if you are on the
county or State Central Committee, please make sure to attend all the
meetings this next year.  There are clearly a number of areas that need
some housecleaning and Conservatives will need your support and your
vote.

Thank you, I'll now step off my soapbox and go to bed.

- ----------------
Charles Hardy
<[e-mail]>

________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

- -

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

Date: Tue, 9 May 2000 10:42:25 -0600
From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fw: MMM Gun Poll

- ----------------
Charles Hardy
<[e-mail]>

- --------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Alan Hepner <[e-mail]>


Check this out .... we were ahead yesterday, now we seem to be losing
badly.  Everyone needs to vote and fix this !!
http://www.sltrib.com/




________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

- -

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

Date: Tue, 9 May 2000 22:40:36 -0600
From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Post convention polling

My wife, Jennifer, was just contacted by a poll this evening which, upon
inquiry, she was told was being funded by "Chris Hill" on behalf of Jeff
Wright to learn why Jeff showed so poorly.  Given the question that were
asked, however, we believe the information is also going to
Leavitt/Hatch/et al.  I won't attempt to suggest what the "correct" or
"best" answers might be to the questions, but if you do happen to be
contacted, I would suggest that this might be one time to consider
parting with a little more info than you normally do so as to send a loud
strong message that rank and file, moderate Republicans are unhappy about
guns, taxes, land issues, and health care/insurance.  ... Or...maybe they
already know that and it is still wise to keep ones cards close to the
chest, I don't know.  Anyway the questions, in order as Jennifer recalled
them:

Did you attend the convention as a delegate?

First time as a delegate?

Voted for Hatch?

Voted for Leavitt?

(when no)
Was that vote "FOR" another candidate or was it "AGAINST" Leavitt?

(when for someone else on first ballot, but against Leavitt on second
ballot)
Why against Leavitt?  What issues?

How did you vote in the 2nd CD?

(when for someone other than Wright)
Why did you not vote for Wright?

- ----------------
Charles Hardy
<[e-mail]>

________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

- -

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

Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 14:34:43 -0600
From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Counter Million Mom March

I'm informed and requested to pass along that there will be a protest or
counter march to the Million Mom March being held in SLC on Mothers' Day.
 Meet at 2:30 pm at the SL city/county building (2100 S State).

For more details call "Bob" at 801-277-0085.

The forward below is from Nancy and is an interesting idea for those
attending the countermarch.

- ----------------
Charles Hardy
<[e-mail]>

- --------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Nancy" <[e-mail]>
To: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 7 May 2000 09:58:22 -0400
Subject: Rapists for Gun Control
Message-ID: <002901bfb82c$54877ae0$2e4f56d1@nancyher>

Thank You for taking the time to turn out in support of ôsensible gun
lawsö
Please print and distribute to as many people as possible. Leave
them in places where they will be seen. Post them anywhere. We have
only one week to issue a reality check to the brain dead American public.
One week to piss off as many mothers as possible. This document will do
it.
Guaranteed. The Million Mothers want to appeal to emotion, so should we.
Fire up your printer and keep the copies going out.




======

Thank You for taking the time to turn out in support of ôsensible gun
lawsö

We here at  Rapists for Gun Control

Fully support the effort of the Million Misinformed Mothers to Disarm the
naive American Public and make the night safer for our members.

Thousands of our members are legally killed each year with firearms by
women
exercising their constitutional right to self protection.
We here at Rapists for Gun Control welcome your help in ending this
tragedy.

Paid for in part with contributions from Muggers for Gun Control

==================================================================
Charles C. Hardy
Utah Email Coordinator--Women Against Gun Control
<[e-mail]>

________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

- -

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

Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 12:19:17 -0600
From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Who's really behind the Million "Mom" March

A little info about the organizers of the Million "Mom" March:


==================================================================
Charles C. Hardy
Utah Email Coordinator--Women Against Gun Control
<[e-mail]>


ôMillion Mom Marchö, mothers maternal instinct?  Bull----!  Read this
article from the Washington Post to uncover people truly behind it.  You
will NOT be surprised!

It exposes the so-called mother (Ms. Donna Dees- Thomases) who was the
brainchild of the ôMillion Mom Marchö to register all hand guns and more.
 Ms. Donna Dees- Thomases who was supposed to be just a New Jersey mother
is also:

╖       A part time publicist for CBS
╖       Was Dan RatherÆs publicist
╖       Is the sister-in-law of Susan Thomases, who just happens to be
Hillary Clinton's best friend and             closest political adviser

http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/ed-column-2000510173326.htm


________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

- -

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

Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 16:05:05 -0600
From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Letter in today's DesNews needs response

This letter appeared in today's (Friday, May 12) opinion section of the
Deseret News <http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,165011602,00.html?>.
I believe a response or 100 would be in order.

Concealed guns didn't help

                  Where were the "pistol-packin' mamas" when we needed
them Thursday night? The shooting spree at Chevys was tragic, but why
didn't somebody pull out his or her
            concealed weapon to stop the carnage?
                  Did concealed weapons make a difference? I don't think
so. Could you imagine if several people in Chevys had pulled out weapons
and opened fire on the gunman? How many
            more deaths would have occurred?
                  Concealed weapons don't count for a hill of beans when
reality kicks in. Random acts of violence will still occur, and concealed
weapons will only compound the problem or
            make no difference at all ù as was the case in Sandy/Midvale.

            Jeff Olsen
            West Valley City

==================================================================
Charles C. Hardy
Utah Email Coordinator--Women Against Gun Control
<[e-mail]>

________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

- -

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

Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 17:10:16 -0600
From: "Karl Pearson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Hitler on Guns

"1935 will go down in History!  For the first time, a civilized nation has
full gun registration!  Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient
and the world will follow our lead to the future!"
 --Adolf Hitler

"History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected peoples
to carry arms have prepared their own fall."
 --Adolf Hitler, Edict of 18 March 1939


We visited my in-laws for Mother's day yesterday. My father was born in
Germany and knows history. He included in our discussions yesterday some
interesting things about Hitler's beginnings. He began to require gun owners
to lock their firearms in a bunker when they were not being used "for
greater security from thieves". One day, the locks had been changed and no
one had access to their own firearms. Shortly thereafter, Jews began to die.
You know that story, and if you are wise, have considered the fact that it
couldn't have happened if Hitler hadn't first disarmed his citizenry?

You should know that the Million Moron March on Washington D.C. (sorry I've
given away my bias) was organized by a woman who is a close friend and
confidant of Hillary Clinton. Also, remember this quote from May, 1991:

"Our task of creating a socialist America can only succeed when those who
would resist us have been totally disarmed."
 --Sarah Brady, president of Gun Control, Inc. and wife of James Brady after
which the Brady Gun Control Bill was named

Ms. Brady has also said that people should not be allowed to own guns for
self-defense. Yet in debates, employees of Gun Control, Inc. steadfastly
deny that the organization believes in the policies articulated by its
leaders. In short, they are lying about what they want to accomplish. This
is understandable, to be sure; but not honorable, or right for the country.

Those who fail to learn history are destined to repeat it.

Karl Pearson
[e-mail]
http://www.xmission.com/~ourfam


- -

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

Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 15:05:25 -0600
From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: WAGC press conference to counter petition drive

Janalee Tobias and Women Against Gun Control have called a press
conference for this Saturday, May 20, at 9:30 am at the Salt Lake Main
Library, 209 E 500 S.

GOP AG Candidate Frank Mylar is slated to attend.

The press conference will denounce efforts to make targets of children
and church goers by outlawing legally carried weapons in schools and
churches.  Jan Graham will also be denounced for misuse of taxpayer funds
in carrying on lobbying efforts.

If you call the Attorney General's Public Information Services phone at
801-366-0260 (as listed on the blue "government" page 42 of your USWest
SLC phone book) and ask for Ms. Graham's voice mail, you will be greeted
by Ms. Graham welcoming you to the "home of the beagle forum..the voice
of normal people."

This press conference should be a good kickoff to US-DIN's leafleting and
information efforts at public libraries that same day to counter the
petition drive by the gun grabbers.

Please attend if possible.



==================================================================
Charles C. Hardy
Utah Email Coordinator--Women Against Gun Control
<[e-mail]>

- -

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

Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 14:50:38 -0600
From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Bill Nash can't do simple math?

It's no wonder the freedom hating, self-wetting, cry-baby, gun grabbers
can't grasp the fact that disarming victims (aka gun control) has, does,
and will kill far more people than it ever saves.  They can't even count
to 25 without error.  How could they ever comprehend numbers like 2.5
million (times a year law abiding citizens twart crime by using or
threating to use a gun in self defense).

From today's SLTrib front page story on the petition drive to ban legally
carried guns from schools and churches comes this quote from Bill Nash:

"My experience is if you ask 25 people, 20 will sign it, five will say no
and one will give you an argument."

20 + 5 +1 = 26 where I come from.  But for Mr. Nash, it somehow adds to
only 25.  :)


==================================================================
Charles C. Hardy
Utah Email Coordinator--Women Against Gun Control
<[e-mail]>

________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

- -

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

Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 15:34:46 -0600
From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Children need to feel safe

The following is forwarded as food for thought.  A great comeback to the
gun grabbers "feel safe" argument.

==================================================================
Charles C. Hardy
Utah Email Coordinator--Women Against Gun Control
<[e-mail]>


- ---forwarded message---

In the church/school gun ban initiative summary they say:

"Utah students have a right to feel safe in their
schools. We, the citizens of Utah, are
determined to provide a safe and secure
learning environment, free from the threat of
gun violence. Schools should be safe places of
learning........"

In the third grade one of my daughters was asked to take a survey at the
beginning of the school year.  One of the questions was:  "I feel safe
when_____"

Her answer:  "I feel safe when dad has a gun".

On a dark night at a high mountain camp I was sitting around a camp fire
with a bunch of children.  I asked them "Are you afraid?"  Their answer
"no!"  I asked, "why not!"  Their answer "you have a gun."

Children feel safe when they know a responsible adult has the means and
ability to protect them!  And that's the truth.

Kirk Love
________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

- -

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

Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 15:58:46 -0600
From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fw: Petition Drive

Looks like one of my emails ended up in Jan's hands.  Her response is
below and was originally sent to the same mail lists as I posted my email
to.   Since those are all closed lists, her response never made it
through.  In the interest of giving everyone a fair hearing, and allowing
you to draw your own conclusions and respond if desired, I'm forwarding
her message, with the header and her return email address, intact.

==================================================================
Charles C. Hardy
Utah Email Coordinator--Women Against Gun Control
<[e-mail]>


- --------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Jan Graham" <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail],
     [e-mail], [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 15:35:07 MDT
Subject: Petition Drive
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Received: from mx2.boston.juno.com (mx2.boston.juno.com [63.211.172.34])
    by m10.boston.juno.com with SMTP id AAA6UMN6RAMWQZPJ
    for <[e-mail]> (sender <[e-mail]>);
    Fri, 19 May 2000 17:35:11 -0400 (EST)
Received: from mx2.jersey.juno.com (mx2.jersey.juno.com [209.67.33.111])
    by mx2.boston.juno.com with SMTP id AAA6UMN6RAJD92PS
    for <[e-mail]> (sender <[e-mail]>);
    Fri, 19 May 2000 17:35:11 -0400 (EST)
Received: from hotmail.com (f51.law7.hotmail.com [216.33.237.51])
    by mx2.jersey.juno.com with SMTP id AAA6UMN6PAMXCWEJ
    for <[e-mail]> (sender <[e-mail]>);
    Fri, 19 May 2000 17:35:09 -0400 (EST)
Received: (qmail 62770 invoked by uid 0); 19 May 2000 21:35:07 -0000
Received: from 161.119.235.21 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP;
    Fri, 19 May 2000 14:35:07 PDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
X-Originating-IP: [161.119.235.21]

I wanted to respond to an email you may have recently received regarding
my
efforts to assist the Safe to Learn-Safe to Worship Coalition.  I
specifically want to respond to accusations that I have used taxpayer
money
to support this effort.

Over the past several days, many people have called the Attorney
General's
Public Information Line to inquire about the gun petition drive or the
Utah
Beagle Forum.  Those questions must be handled by me, not by an AG
employee,
so employees have been instructed to forward those calls to my personal
voice mailbox.  My personal voice mailbox is maintained outside of the
Attorney General's Office and is paid for by me personally.  I
established
the mailbox for the very purpose of providing a way for citizens to
contact
me on political matters so as not to use the resources of the Attorney
General's Office.  Were you to call the Public Information Line to talk
to
me regarding a state matter, someone within the office would be happy to
assist you, or if appropriate, would forward you to my office voice
mailbox,
which is maintained within the Capitol.

At no time during the petition drive have I ever given out the number of
the
AG Public Information Line (366-0260).  People call that number because
it
is the number listed in the phone book for the Attorney General's Office.

The only number I have ever given, both in newspaper ads (also paid for
by
me) and in interviews, has been to the voice mailbox I personally pay for

and maintain (468-1700).  Those who mistakenly call the office instead of

the number provided are told that because it is not an office matter,
their
calls must be forwarded to the appropriate number.

As you know, the issue of guns in schools and churches is one of deep
importance to me, but I have not and would not ever misuse government
resources as has been alleged.  I have a great respect for the Attorney
General's Office and I believe I have been vigilant in protecting its
integrity and in acting responsibly as its leader.
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com


- -

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

Date: Sun, 21 May 2000 10:28:45 -0600
From: "Will Thompson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Hitler on Guns

I've been seeing this quotation spreading around again, and thought I'd
forward another viewpoint to these maillists.  Take it with the usual
grain of salt...(not being a Hitler scholar, I have no idea which side
is correct, although the quotations *seem* a little too perfect to be
true.)

Will

http://www.saf.org/BogusQuotesAntiGunners.html

http://rkba.org/research/rkba.faq

http://www.guntruths.com/Resource/false_quotations_and_other_misin.htm


> -----Original Message-----
> Subject: Hitler on Guns
>
>
> "1935 will go down in History!  For the first time, a civilized nation =
has
> full gun registration!  Our streets will be safer, our police
> more efficient
> and the world will follow our lead to the future!"
>  --Adolf Hitler
>

From the Second Amendment Foundation:

BOGUS, FAKE & QUESTIONABLE QUOTES
FALSELY ATTRIBUTED TO THE
ANTI-GUNNERS

 Gun grabbers twist facts, quote out of context, misuse statistics and
generally misrepresent their real agenda
at every turn. And, unfortunately, these deceitful tactics have led to th=
e
passage of some gun control
measures. Their successes through dishonesty have apparently turned some
well-intentioned pro-gun rights
people into "creative writers."

But no matter how loathsome our enemies become, that is still no excuse f=
or
falsely attributing quotes to
them. In fact, citing a proven false quote only discredits the rest of th=
e
message, even if the person may only
be unintentionally and unknowingly repeating the made-up quote. This can =
be
very damaging to our cause in
debates, letters to the editor, and interviews. Furthermore, resorting to
their methods only lowers us to their
level.

While it is impossible to prove that these are phony quotes, no historian
has been able to verify the original
citation required for authenticity. It is better to be safe than sorry. O=
ne
anti-gun judge discredited a
letter writer by pointing out the fake quote used in that letter to the
editor. The judge writes, "(An
oft-cited Hitler "quote" about gun registration has been proved to be a
hoax, though that has not
stopped many from repeating it.)" CLICK HERE to view the entire Judge's
column, complete with
many inaccuracies of his own.

Please do the pro-gun cause a favor =96 If you locate any websites innoce=
ntly
citing any of the following
quotes, please forward the URL of this page to that page=92s webmaster.
Furthermore, if you can locate
proof that one of these quotes is in fact valid, please forward the
information HERE!


Adolf Hitler

Perhaps the most infamous bogus quote is attributed to Adolf Hitler.
Usually, the questionable passage
reads as follows:

1935 will go down in History! For the first time, a civilized nation has
full gun registration! Our
streets will be safer, our police more efficient and the world will follo=
w
our lead to the future!

Note: This passage sometimes features different punctuation and slight
wording changes including a
beginning of, =91For the first time in history, a....=92 Various citation=
s
include: Adolf Hitler, April 15, 1935, in
address to the Reichstag; Adolf Hitler 1935 'Berlin Daily' (Loose English
Translation) April 15th, 1935
Page 3 Article 2 by Einleitung Von Eberhard Beckmann -"Abschied vom
Hessenland!". "Adolf" is
sometimes misspelled as =91Adolph=92 on the Internet.

While the above 'quote' makes a nice T-shirt, there are numerous problems
with this alleged statement. (1)
It violates the rule of not beginning a sentence with a number. (2) It is=
n=92t
phrased in Hitler=92s style. (3) Major
changes to the German gun laws occurred in 1928 and 1931 (under the Weima=
r
Republic) and in 1938
(under the Nazi=92s). No significant changes happened in the gun registra=
tion
laws in 1935. Furthermore, the
changes in 1928 and 1931 were designed to disarm the Nazis and Communists
and therefore it is doubtful
that Hitler would trumpet the success of any law aimed at his goon squads.

However, if anyone finds the proper historical context from which this
questionable quote was pulled from,
and confirms it with their own eyes, please forward the details and your
contact information HERE!

Until then, please click here for some proven Nazi Quotes. (Coming soon)


SARAH BRADY

Sarah Brady gets bashed by pro-gun rights people for repeatedly changing =
her
stories, downplaying her real
agenda, and outright lying. All of these flaws are fair game, but claimin=
g
she said something didn=92t will not
help our cause, and could actually hurt our efforts.

The following quote was probably aimed at reaching veterans and other
Americans concerned about our
great country=92s move toward either Communism and Socialism. The falseho=
od
reads:

Our task of creating a socialist America can only succeed when those who
would resist us
have been totally disarmed.

This phony quote is often cited as a statement from Sarah Brady, Chairman=
,
HCI, to Howard Metzenbaum,
The National Educator, January, 1994, Page 3. "Sarah" and "Metzenbaum" ar=
e
sometimes misspelled as
"Sara" and "Metzanbaum" on the Internet.

There are several problems with this quote, including the fact that the
common citation does not check out.
In addition, Sarah Brady would usually be considered a conservative
Republican on most politic issues
besides firearms, and therefore not likely to embrace much more of the
Socialist agenda than gun control.


JANET RENO

Janet Reno is no friend to gun owners, and certainly earned her place in
history for Ruby Ridge and Waco
disasters, but she did not say the following:

The most effective means of fighting crime in the United States is to out=
law
the possession of
any type of firearm by the civilian populace.

This non-statement, is falsely attributed to Janet Reno, then-state attor=
ney
for Dade County, in an alleged
speech to Ft. Lauderdale, Florida B'nai B'rith gathering. The date that t=
his
is to have supposedly occurred is
listed as 1984, 1991 and even 1995 (as Attorney General). Blame Janet Ren=
o
for the atrocities that are
real, not make-believe statements.


CONCLUSION

The bottom line is that it is wise to play it safe! Beat up the gun grabb=
ers
for the numerous things that they
have done and said. Their real actions and statements are bad enough with=
out
any embellishment being
necessary. Stay honest to keep our credibility high and theirs low.

If you have information to the contrary, please send the details and your
contact information HERE!

The information provided on these pages are from a variety of sources. Fo=
r
more information about
questionable quotations, please visit the GunCite.com website. GunCite.co=
m
has an excellent analysis of
some of these infamous non-statements HERE. In addition, please check out
Firing Back by Clayton
Cramer, part of the SAF bookshelf.


Copyright =A9 1999 Second Amendment Foundation, All Rights Reserved.
Second Amendment Foundation
James Madison Building
12500 N.E. Tenth Place
Bellevue, WA 98005

Voice: 425-454-7012
Toll Free: 800-426-4302
FAX: [phone]
email: [e-mail]



- -

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

Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 13:52:51 -0600
From: charles hardy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Campaign of Intimidation?

This piece of drivel is from today's DesNews editorial page.  Normally
the strawman arguments and sidestepping of the saliant points (like why
should a person's right to effectively defend themselves be limited by
geography, or what evidence is there to suggest Utah's 30,000 CCW
permitees are not already compentan) would have been bad enough.  But the
closing paragraph, accusing self-defense supporters of waging a "campaign
of intimidation" is downright slanderous, IMO.

I believe that especially those who turned out to help educate the masses
need to now take a few moments to write and submit a letter to the
editor.  In addittion to debunking any notion of which side actually is
more likely to get rude and nasty, it might also be useful to relay any
observations about whether those signing the petition even knew what they
were signing.  After all, the DesNews thinks we should put this on the
ballot so Utahns can "express their feelings" at the ballot box.  From
what I've heard, that is all they'll be expressing as the vast majority
of them lack sufficient information to have any thoughts on the matter.

Gun issue isn't 'winner-take-all'

            Deseret News editorial

                  An intruder turned life upside down for a 51-year-old
Salt Lake man this past weekend. A 20-something man, he smashed through a
window and entered the Salt Lake
            residence about 2:40 a.m. Sunday, and the 51-year-old who
lives there shot him dead. Although the case has not yet been reviewed by
prosecutors, police assert it rises to the
            level of justifiable homicide.
                  Given what we know at this point, it appears the
homeowner was within his rights to shoot at the intruder. He did so under
direct threat to him and his wife. We take no issue
            with the shooter's actions, nor with his right to bear arms.
                  Unfortunately, this is the kind of case gun-rights
advocates are likely to latch onto. No one should be surprised if they
single out this homeowner as a poster boy du jour in the
            lobbying campaign against the "Safe to Learn, Safe to
Worship" citizen initiative. But to do so would be wrong, because this
incident is completely unrelated to the aims of the
            citizen initiative.
                  Private gun ownership is not an issue here. The
petition does not concern itself with the debate over whether the Second
Amendment permits gun ownership or whether it
            refers only to arming a state militia. Nor do we. Instead,
our concern is twofold: that people who own guns acknowledge and accept
the responsibilities that come with that right
            and that the gun debate not degenerate into a
winner-takes-all dialogue. Common-sense answers can be found on middle
ground if both sides would only cease to view guns as a
            black-and-white issue.
                  Guns aren't going away. They have been a part of the
American landscape from the beginning. Americans need to become educated
about them and learn to live with and
            respect them.
                  Because guns, and private gun ownership, aren't going
away ù despite the National Rifle Association's incessant harping that
gun rights are under grave threat ù gun-rights
            advocates should not summarily dismiss every proposed rule or
law on principle. They should not make the quantum leap in logic that
says banning concealed weapons from
            schools and churches is a slippery slope to gun confiscation
by government soldiers.
                  Such scare tactics discredit the gun-rights lobby and
stand in the way of common-sense gun legislation, such as that which
would require concealed weapons permit-holders,
            who now number 30,000 in Utah, to demonstrate firearms
competency before they are granted a permit.
                  The citizen initiative gives Utahns an opportunity to
speak on the issue of concealed weapons, whether the Legislature went too
far in liberalizing the law in 1995.
                  Whether Utahns back the initiative or not, they should
sign petitions to put it to a vote of the people, and those opposed to
the initiative should stop their campaign of
            intimidation. With a May 30 deadline looming, Utahns need to
act now so they can express their feelings at the ballot box in November.


==================================================================
Charles C. Hardy
Utah Email Coordinator--Women Against Gun Control
<[e-mail]>

- -

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

Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 14:49:30 -0700
From: James L. Mayhugh <[e-mail]>
Subject: CCW Forums Website

I've just launched the CCW Forums website to address the growing
number of Concealed Handgun Permit Holders throughout the country.
This forum is meant to be a clearinghouse of information and ideas. I
am also interested in getting CCW and Firearms Instructors together to
share views and opinions in a private forum.

If this is of interest to you, please stop by http://www.ccwforums.com

Regards,
James L. Mayhugh
NRA Life Member
GOA Life Member
LEAA Life Member
NSRPA Life Member
JPFO Member
=46ront Sight Firearms Training Institute Instructor
NRA Certified Firearms Instructor
NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
NRA Recruiter
Arizona Licensed Firearms Instructor
North Dakota Licensed Firearms Instructor
Utah Licensed Firearms Instructor
E-Mail: [e-mail]
Web Sites: http://www.gmj.com
                       http://www.ccwforums.com

- -

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

Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 14:33:14 -0600
From: Scott Bergeson <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: Article I, Section 10

- -----
Subject: Article I, Section 10
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 10:55:43 -0500
From: Andy Barniskis <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

Notable friends:

I'm sending this to a handful of people in the gun rights
movement whose opinions I respect, to obtain their judgment of
one of my ideas/opinions.

A couple years ago while reading the main body of the
constitution, it struck me that Article I, Section 10 prohibits
the states from "maintaining troops" without the express consent
of congress.  It seems to me that regarding the question of "the
meaning of the Second Amendment," that shoots holes in the now-
popular argument that the Second Amendment was intended to grant
states the blanket right to maintain National Guard-like
organized forces.

And yet, I don't recall the issue of Article I, Section 10 ever
being raised, and when I have raised it, even in the gun rights
community, I get the sense that no one finds it a very compelling
argument.  By contrast I, possibly as a habitual contrarion,
don't find the widely popular "quote the founders" (e.g., George
Mason, "Who are the militia?) arguments terribly compelling --
VALID, just not very compelling.

The only argument I thought of, and since encountered, against my
Article I, Section 10, argument, is that possibly the later
Second Amendment could be construed as overriding it.  Here I
think the "quotes of the Founders" definitely does come into
play, as I'm sure if there had been ONE example of the Bill of
Rights REVERSING a basic premise of the constitution, or the
consensus regarding its intent, the Anti-Federalists, who opposed
ratification, would have been all over it saying, "See?  Your
constitution isn't even ratified yet and ALREADY you're changing
it. . ."  I have found no evidence at all of such a debate, which
inclines me to believe that EVERYONE, including the Federalists
and Anti-Federalists, agreed that the intent of the constitution,
including, or especially, the constitution with the Bill of
Rights included, was to prohibit standing armies at any level of
government, without the consent of congress.

But my basic questions are,

o  Has this argument been done, and I'm just not aware of it?

o  If it has been done, has it been found wanting in the debate?

o  If it is valid, or reasonably so, what is there about it that
   no one but me seems to find it very interesting?

I'll admit I have read and FORGOTTEN more than I now know about
these historical arguments, so if someone can point me toward
some writing on the subject -- even if it is embarrassing, "You
should have remembered THAT" sort of stuff, I'd appreciate it.

- --Andy Barniskis

- -

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

End of utah-firearms-digest V2 #190
***********************************