ftp.xmission.com

home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search

/ ftp.xmission.com / 2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar / ftp.xmission.com / pub / lists / utah-firearms / archive / v02.n221 < prev next >

Wrap

Internet Message Format | 2001-12-11 | 43KB

From: owner-utah-firearms-digest@lists.xmission.com (utah-firearms-digest) To: utah-firearms-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: utah-firearms-digest V2 #221 Reply-To: utah-firearms-digest Sender: owner-utah-firearms-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-utah-firearms-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk utah-firearms-digest Wednesday, December 12 2001 Volume 02 : Number 221 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 11:19:41 -0700 From: Charles C Hardy <utbagpiper@juno.com> Subject: Clark Aposhian to debate anti gunners at noon on channel 2 Sorry for the late notice many will not get it until it is past due, but Rod Decker just barely called Clark and myself on this issue. Clark will appear opposite the anti-gunners during the 12 noon Channel 2 newscast today (Monday, Nov 19). The antis are, yet again, calling for Brady Checks on all sales at gun shows. Of course, this call only affects private sales since dealers must do a background check on every sale regardless of where it takes place. But they don't say that, they just talk about the "gun show loophole." Make no mistake, the "gun show loophole" is just good cover for requiring that EVERY private sale require a background check or even take place via a licensed dealer as in California. And we all know Cali's crime rate is sooo much lower than Utah's. NOT! We don't know how much air time this issue, or each side might get, so "debate" may be a little strong. It may end up being nothing more than two sound bites. In any event, if you have the chance, tune in and let us know how things turn out. Charles ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 11:49:22 -0700 From: Charles C Hardy <utbagpiper@juno.com> Subject: Anti-gun Utah State personnel policy to be rescinded...for now From today's DesNews. Good news as far as it goes, but we and pro-gun legislators need to be vigilant to avoid some new policy, worded differently but with the same end effect, from ever being enacted. We also need to push this issue with the UofU, school districts, and other government entities that are still in violation of the law. I, for one, would hope that non-LEO government employees at such places as water treatement plants, sewer plants, and other infrastructure that could become targets for terrorism would be allowed, if not encouraged, to get trained and carry a weapon for defense of both themselves and the facilities at which they work. My thanks to Mark Shurtleff, Sarah Thompson, Clark Aposhian, and others--including legislators who worked on this issue in various ways over the last couple of years--who have worked to bring about this much needed change in our State. Charles http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,355007191,00.html? Concealed weapons are OK for state staff By Bob Bernick Jr. Deseret News political editor State employees with concealed-weapons permits will be allowed to carry their guns to work. Utah state personnel officials, following an opinion written by Attorney General Mark Shurtleff, will soon rescind an internal rule that prohibits state employees from packing their legally permitted guns while on the job. The process of rescinding the rule starts Dec. 1, state human-resources spokesman Con Whipple said. Whipple said the change comes after Gov. Mike Leavitt's office brought up the issue after getting Shurtleff's opinion, which was apparently sent to them several months ago. Shurtleff spokesman Paul Murphy, citing attorney/client privilege, said he can't release the opinion. "But Mark wrote it himself" without being requested to do so by any state agency ù not the governor's office, not state personnel officials, Murphy said. Shurtleff "is, as you know, a strong supporter of gun rights" and decided to look into the controversy himself, Murphy added. Whipple said, "We received a request from the governor, made after a legal opinion ù which is covered by attorney/client privilege ù saying that the rule is probably in conflict" with the state statute. The rule to be rescinded reads: "Employees shall not carry firearms in any facility owned or operated by the state, or in any state vehicle, or at any time or any place while on state business." Law officers or those who must carry weapons as part of their jobs are exempt from the rule. Likewise, there are exceptions to the concealed-weapons law ù all weapons are banned in airports, jails and courts of law. They can also be banned from churches and private residences, but the owners of the property must somehow tell visitors all weapons are banned. Some Utah churches have posted "no weapons" signs at their doors. But outside of those exceptions, a law-abiding citizen with a concealed-carry permit can carry weapons almost anywhere ù even though a number of state and local entities and school districts still have policies against firearms on their properties. Gun-control advocates say Utah has one of the most liberal concealed-carry laws in the nation. Elwood Powell, chairman of the Utah Shooting Sports Council, a Second Amendment rights group, said it's about time the state recognized that its personnel rule violated state law and got rid of it. "We always thought it was in conflict, and a legislative attorney's opinion said that more than a year ago," Powell said. Maura Carabello of the Gun Violence Prevention Center of Utah said she's disappointed by the change. "I and other Utahns have to interact with government in state offices, and we should be able to presume that those places are safe" from those carrying concealed weapons. Her group is running a citizen initiative petition seeking to ban all weapons from public schools and churches. There's no way to determine how many of the state's 16,000 employees hold concealed-weapons permits or would bring guns to work if they did. The list of permit-holders is secret, known only to law enforcement officials. Across the state, just over 42,000 adults have concealed-carry permits. Whipple said there have been only a handful of problems with state workers bringing their concealed weapons to work. In cases where they were caught, disciplinary action was taken, starting with putting a letter of reprimand in the offender's personnel record. Whipple said after the rule is officially rescinded, "we will look at the alternatives" in controlling weapons in state buildings, state cars and on state employees who are engaged in state business. Other state entities, such as the University of Utah, have independent policies that ban all weapons from their facilities, whether carried by staff, students or visitors. If a new anti-weapon rule for state employees is adopted by state personnel officials, it won't be until next July, after the review is finished, Whipple said. Powell, an attorney, said he had no advice to give state officials should they try again to ban legally permitted concealed weapons from employees on the job. "Except I'd say if someone (in a state building) is harmed by some loony(who attacks them), then the state should pick up all the social and medical costs for denying the constitutionally protected right of self-protection." Leavitt, over the past two years, has often found himself on the political wrong side of Second Amendment rights advocates, many of them in his own Republican Party. Leavitt originally wanted action to clearly ban all guns ù including those carried by law-abiding concealed-weapon permit-holders ù from public schools and churches. A series of Deseret News/KSL public opinion polls shows most Utahns agree with that stand. GOP legislative leaders two years ago refused Leavitt's attempt to call a special legislative session to deal with some gun violence issues following two high-profile shootings in downtown Salt Lake City. Gun-rights advocates formed the core of an anti-Leavitt movement within the Utah Republican Party that saw Leavitt ù popular among Utahns at large ù denied renomination outright in the 2000 state GOP convention. Leavitt was forced into a primary with an unknown challenger from the right wing of his party. Ultimately, Leavitt won re-election to a third, four-year term in 2000. Shurtleff, a Republican who says he supports Second Amendment rights, helped out earlier this year when it appeared the State Republican Convention would ban concealed-weapons holders from packing their sidearms during a speech by Vice President Dick Cheney. The Secret Service routinely bans guns at events attended by the president and vice president. Shurtleff arranged for gun lockers to be set up outside the Sandy convention center and about two dozens conventioneers checked in their guns during Cheney's appearance. ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 09:03:34 -0700 From: Scott Bergeson <shbergeson@qwest.net> Subject: FW: WTC Hijackers Obeyed Our Laws Until - -------- Original Message -------- Subject: WTC Hijackers Obeyed Our Laws Until Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 09:38:36 -0500 From: "Joe Eldred" <Joe2001@keepandbeararms.com> To: safe-sky@vader.com The U.S. Government's response to the 9/11 attacks has been much like a hand grenade, exploding in all directions at once in order to (hopefully) catch the perpetrators or make new laws that will prevent future terrorism. But even a cursory analysis of the hijackers' behavior reveals that the political class still fails to recognize the ONE ACT OF DEFENSE that could have PREVENTED the hijackings, and to implement the proper remedy. The hijackers apparently obeyed all of our laws - until the final moment when they took over the planes. They immigrated LEGALLY. They lived within the law, renting apartments and motels, and paying their bills. They even got Social Security Numbers and credit cards. And they passed successfully through the airport checkpoints. So the INS, DMV, banks and credit agencies, and airport screeners, are NOT to blame for the 9/11 disaster. The hijackers also PAID for their own tickets, so the AIRLINES are not to blame. By obeying our laws, the hijackers made themselves INVISIBLE. So where did the breakdown come? The pilots are the LAST LINE OF DEFENSE against a hijacking. They are at the controls and must be captured, overcome, or neutralized. Once everyone is on-board, the doors shut, and the craft underway, everyone is at the mercy of any person(s) on-board who is willing to initiate aggression against others. Fortunately, pilots and crews just want to do their jobs. And passengers just want to reach their destinations. So there is seldom any conflict. But this time, a small group of dedicated terrorists, trained in stealth and cunning, and "armed" only with knives, but filled with intense determination, had a clear field of operation because everybody else had been disarmed. Thus the one act of defense that could have prevented the hijackings is ARMED RESPONSE by the pilots, crew and/or passengers. They were NOT armed, because of FAA policy. Thus the FAA is the one single, solitary culprit that deserves the final blame for the hijackings and subsequent catastrophe. FAA officials who implemented the 'no-arms' policy, should all be FIRED, then charged with dereliction of duty, manslaughter, and violation of the crew's and passengers' 2nd Amendment rights. The FAA, an unconstitutional agency anyway, should be PRIVATIZED asap and taken away from the government. Pilots should be armed. Crew members should likewise have tools of self-defense, whether they be guns, scissors or letter openers. And passengers should be allowed defensive tools, as well. The current policy of disarming people to the point of confiscating knitting needles, fingernail clippers and umbrellas, is insanity squared and cannot possibly prevent a repetition of 9/11. Writing more laws won't catch future terrorists, either, because they will just obey those laws, too-until they are ready to act. Even if government were competent, it couldn't protect everyone everywhere all the time. Each of us needs to be able to protect ourselves. We have a moral right to self-preservation. Instead of conquering the government, let the terrorists try to conquer 200 million individuals. The 2nd Amendment needs to be recognized IN THE AIR as well as on the ground. Don Hull Costa Mesa, CA *** Mr. Hull submitted this article for the JPFO Unpopular Speech page at http://www.jpfo.org/unpopularspeech.htm. NEVER AGAIN UNARMED.... LET FREEDOM FIGHT! - --- > PROJECT: SAFE SKIES MAILING LIST > PROJECT: SAFE SKIES WEBSITE http://www.projectsafeskies.org > List Moderator: hunter@mva.net > TO UN/SUBSCRIBE: send blank email with command as subject - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 18:43:52 -0500 From: "Chad Leigh, Pengar Enterprises, Inc & Shire.Net LLC" <chad@pengar.com> Subject: chalk one up for the dummies http://www.reuters.com/news_article.jhtml?type=topnews&StoryID=401645 Pengar Enterprises, Inc. and Shire.Net LLC Web and Macintosh Consulting -- full service web hosting Chad Leigh chad@pengar.com chad@shire.net - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 10:58:10 -0700 From: Charles C Hardy <utbagpiper@juno.com> Subject: SLTRIB editorial From today's SLTrib. Forwarded without comment other than to suggest it would probably be a very good use of time to be in attendance at and offer well-thought out written comments during whatever public comment meetings are held regarding the gun ban. With any luck, the exact same reasoning that has applied to the governor's illegal gun ban can and will be applied to the illegal gun bans at other goverment agencies like the University of Utah, public school districts, etc. Charles http://www.sltrib.com/11282001/opinion/152767.htm Release Gun Opinion Wednesday, November 28, 2001 So why all the secrecy? Utah Atty. Gen. Mark Shurtleff wrote an unsolicited opinion to Gov. Mike Leavitt declaring that a rule banning state employees with concealed-carry permits from bringing their weapons into the workplace violates state law. The opinion, apparently, reiterates what legislative attorneys had already said three years ago. Yet, Shurtleff refuses to release his opinion, citing attorney-client privilege. Attorney-client privilege only applies when litigation is pending. Shurtleff has not mentioned any official challenges to the rule, so why not let the public know what legal reasoning supports public employees packing heat? The issue is particularly important since the next step toward withdrawal of the rule is a public comment period. The public can't make informed comments without knowing the legal reasoning behind the rule change. The attorney general is legal counsel for the governor. He has a general duty to protect his client's confidentiality. But he is also an elected official whose records are public information under the Government Records and Management Act. Shurtleff issued an unsolicited opinion. That opinion is reviewable by the public under GRAMA unless it is related to litigation. The opinion is, similarly, not protected by the attorney-client privilege. Moreover, whatever harm the attorney general fears from releasing his opinion must be minimal given the general consensus between the attorney general and the legislative counsel regarding the ban on weapons. Since the Legislature also has asked the attorney general for an official opinion, which will be public information, Shurtleff's original opinion for the governor hardly merits the claimed confidentiality. The issue is an important one for the public. Whatever side a person is on in the gun debate, the public has a right to know if its employees are permitted to carry concealed weapons to work. There is no legitimate excuse for hiding the legal reasoning of the state's counsel from those who will be impacted: public employees and the public at large. The news is out, the rule banning weapons is on the path to deletion. If the public is expected to comment on the change in a meaningful manner, Shurtleff must explain the reasons for the change. Release the original opinion to the public. ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 09:38:02 -0700 From: "Scott Bergeson" <shbergeson@qwest.net> Subject: A doctor's comments This article is in Issue #150 of _The Libertarian Enterprise_ which can be found at: http://www.webleyweb.com/tle/ TERRORISM VS. TYRANNY - WHICH IS MORE DANGEROUS? by Andrew Johnstone, RPh/MD Doctors for Sensible Gun Laws http://www.dsgl.org Special to TLE Americans are certainly up to the task of getting back to our normal lives - I'd trust any U.S. citizen to unfailingly choose the best option for long-distance phone service, or the best accessory package on a new minivan. As far as our ability to respond intelligently, rationally, or effectively to terrorism, I have my doubts. We lost nearly 4,000 innocent citizens on September 11th, but our spoiled and historically clueless culture seems oblivious to the well-documented fact that consistently, an average country the size of the U.S. will use its police and military to murder that many of their own citizens every three weeks. According to R.J. Rummel ("Death by Government" ISBN 1-56000-145-3), other nations have killed an average of 4,635 innocent civilians per day for the past 100 years - - at about 1/25th the world population, our "share" would be 67,671 deaths every year. In "Death by Gun Control," (ISBN 0-9642304-6-1) Zelman & Stevens point out that such genocides only happen in countries where "reasonable" gun laws like "registration" were instituted "to fight crime and terrorism." Thus, governments are considerably more dangerous to their own citizens than crime, gun accidents, and suicide combined, and yes - even terrorism. Their weapon? - gun control. Other than the warm and fuzzy feeling we get when we compromise, what wonderous benefits of gun control could possibly offset such irreversable dangers...? Overall suicide rates do not vary with gun laws (switching methods saves no lives), gun accidents are at an all time low despite an enormous increase in gun ownership, and most criminologists now feel that strict gun laws tend to increase murder rates, if they affect it at all. Fortunately, perhaps because more states are making it easy for ordinary citizens to carry concealed weapons, murder rates are also on the decline. It is also obvious that tough gun laws aren't going to stop terrorists using ordinary boxcutters to overpower crew and passengers already disarmed by useless, symbolic gun laws. We have been spared genocide, because the authors of our Constitution were wise enough to stifle the seeds of tyranny with a Bill of Rights which specifically prohibits "gun control." In a series of amendments dealing with the timeless balance of power between government and citizen, only a blithering idiot could interpret the Second Amendment as meant simply to arm a federalized National Guard, which as a standing army is the antithesis of a "well-regulated militia," or that alongside the other lofty rights of citizens our founders decided to assure deer hunters a successful season by allowing merely those types of firearms "suitable for legitimate sporting purposes." Our founders wrote the Bill of Rights during a time when terrorism very much existed, in the form of roving bands of guerilla fighters who would kill innocent civilians, in return for bounties paid for their scalps, and biowarfare consisted of sealed barrels of smallpox-victims' blankets presented as "peace offerings" to kill off the mercenaries and their families after they had served their purpose. The Bill of Rights contains no "exceptions" to any of the first ten amendments during times of "national crisis" or "terrorism" or whatever else might panic our pusillanimous politicians into passing "antiterrorism" bills they admit they've not even read. Neither terrorism nor corrupt political leadership are new concepts, so as we celebrate Bill of Rights Day, let's keep that in mind, and maybe instead of buying another flag to wave, spend the dime calling congress and reminding them why Americans have guns. (Hint - it's the same reason citizens living under the Taliban regime didn't have them). - - - - Andrew Johnstone, RPh/MD Doctors for Sensible Gun Laws - http://www.dsgl.org/ 8921 Southpointe # C-1 Indianapolis, IN 46227 317-881-3725 - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 13:36:17 -0500 From: Chad Leigh -- Pengar Enterprises Inc. <chad@pengar.com> Subject: History Channel: Firing Ranges Hi All I don't know about Utah cable since I am not in Utah any longer but, at least in NH, tonight on Modern Marvels on the History Channel there is a feature on "Firing Ranges." In NH it is at 10pm. I suspect you can check historychannel.com for your local area. Chad - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 13:55:05 -0700 From: Charles C Hardy <utbagpiper@juno.com> Subject: The good gal wins This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. - ----__JNP_000_6f16.687f.629b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bookstore assailant gets shelved Owner shows pistol -- end of story Thursday, December 06, 2001 By Matt Miller Of Our Carlisle Bureau CARLISLE -- When a would-be robber walked into Erin Moul's used-book store and demanded that she open the cash register, she told him, "no." When the man persisted on Tuesday, she showed him why she wasn't going to open it -- the 9mm pistol she pulled from her purse. Yesterday, Moul, owner of Cover to Cover Books in the 100 block of North Hanover Street, still had all her cash. The man accused of trying to rob her, Charles W. Hinton Jr., 35, of Carlisle, was in Cumberland County Prison on charges of robbery, simple assault and criminal attempt. He was being held in lieu of $50,000 bail. "He came in about 10 minutes before 6," Moul, 34, of Shiremanstown, said as she recounted the foiled robbery attempt. "He walks in and says, 'Do you sell any comic books?'" She said she told him she did not but the man kept "meandering" around the store. That gave her the feeling something was up, she said. "I didn't think he was going to rob me," Moul said. "I thought he was going to knock over a display." Finally, she said, the man came around the back of the counter -- as she backed away toward her purse -- and he said, "I need you to open the cash register." "I was like, 'I don't think so!'" Moul recalled. She said that when the man repeated his demand, she replied: "No. And I have a really good reason not to open my register. You want to see why?' "So I pulled out my 9mm and I said, 'Here's why.'" "I held it up and showed it to him," Moul said, demonstrating by pointing the weapon -- which she said was loaded at the time of the attempted robbery -- at the ceiling. "Then I said, 'Why don't you try robbing somebody who doesn't have a gun?' "That just freaked him out," said Moul, who has a permit to carry her pistol. "He apologized. He said, 'I'm sorry. Some of my friends put me up to this.'" When the man left the store, Moul said, she immediately called Carlisle police. Officers were at her door while she was still on the phone with the dispatcher. Within 40 minutes, they had a suspect -- Hinton -- for her to identify, she said. "I was absolutely stunned at how fast they moved," Moul said. Police said Hinton was arraigned before District Justice Harold Bender and sent to the prison. A preliminary hearing is scheduled for Dec. 12. Cumberland County Court records show Hinton has served jail time in the county on convictions for drug, assault and terroristic-threat offenses. Lt. Barry Walters of the Carlisle force said he could not remember a case like Moul's in his 22 years with the borough police. Moul, who said she would have fired if the man had come any closer to her, admitted to a mix of emotions about the incident. "It was the funniest thing," she said of the look on the would-be robber's face when she pulled her pistol. "It was terrible, but it was kind of humorous." Matt Miller may be reached at 249-2006 or mmiller@patriot-news.com. - ----__JNP_000_6f16.687f.629b Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META content=3Dtext/html;charset=3Diso-8859-1 http-equiv=3Dcontent-type> <META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.3315.2869" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY bottomMargin=3D0 leftMargin=3D3 rightMargin=3D3 topMargin=3D0><FONT=20 face=3DARIAL,SANS-SERIF size=3D2> Bookstore assailant gets shelved Owner shows pistol -- end of story Thursday, December 06, 2001By Matt Miller Of Our Carlisle= =20 Bureau CARLISLE -- When a would-be robber walked into Erin Moul's used-book = store=20 and demanded that she open the cash register, she told him, "no."=20 When the man persisted on Tuesday, she showed him why she wasn't going = to=20 open it -- the 9mm pistol she pulled from her purse. Yesterday, Moul, owner of Cover to Cover Books in the 100 block of North= =20 Hanover Street, still had all her cash. The man accused of trying to rob her, Charles W. Hinton Jr., 35, of = Carlisle,=20 was in Cumberland County Prison on charges of robbery, simple assault and=20 criminal attempt. He was being held in lieu of $50,000 bail. "He came in about 10 minutes before 6," Moul, 34, of Shiremanstown, said= as=20 she recounted the foiled robbery attempt. "He walks in and says, 'Do you = sell=20 any comic books?'" She said she told him she did not but the man kept "meandering" around = the=20 store. That gave her the feeling something was up, she said. "I didn't think he was going to rob me," Moul said. "I thought he was = going=20 to knock over a display." Finally, she said, the man came around the back of the counter -- as she= =20 backed away toward her purse -- and he said, "I need you to open the cash=20 register." "I was like, 'I don't think so!'" Moul recalled. She said that when the man repeated his demand, she replied: "No. And I = have=20 a really good reason not to open my register. You want to see why?' "So I pulled out my 9mm and I said, 'Here's why.'" "I held it up and showed it to him," Moul said, demonstrating by = pointing the=20 weapon -- which she said was loaded at the time of the attempted robbery --= at=20 the ceiling. "Then I said, 'Why don't you try robbing somebody who doesn't = have=20 a gun?' "That just freaked him out," said Moul, who has a permit to carry her = pistol.=20 "He apologized. He said, 'I'm sorry. Some of my friends put me up to this.'= "=20 When the man left the store, Moul said, she immediately called Carlisle= =20 police. Officers were at her door while she was still on the phone with the= =20 dispatcher. Within 40 minutes, they had a suspect -- Hinton -- for her to=20 identify, she said. "I was absolutely stunned at how fast they moved," Moul said. Police said Hinton was arraigned before District Justice Harold Bender = and=20 sent to the prison. A preliminary hearing is scheduled for Dec. 12. Cumberland County Court records show Hinton has served jail time in the= =20 county on convictions for drug, assault and terroristic-threat offenses. </= P> Lt. Barry Walters of the Carlisle force said he could not remember a = case=20 like Moul's in his 22 years with the borough police. Moul, who said she would have fired if the man had come any closer to = her,=20 admitted to a mix of emotions about the incident. "It was the funniest thing," she said of the look on the would-be robber= 's=20 face when she pulled her pistol. "It was terrible, but it was kind of = humorous."=20 Matt Miller may be reached at 249-2006 or mmiller@patriot-news.com.=20 </BODY></HTML> - ----__JNP_000_6f16.687f.629b-- ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 16:34:22 -0700 From: Scott Bergeson <shbergeson@qwest.net> Subject: Optics expert rebuts Waco standoff report GUNFIRE CALLED LIKELY Optics expert rebuts Waco standoff report http://www.azstarnet.com/star/fri/11207WACOOPTICGS.html - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 18:12:05 -0700 From: Scott Bergeson <shbergeson@qwest.net> Subject: Arm the co-eds Arm the co-eds - ---------- LewRockwell.com by Walter Block and William Barnett II "There has been a spate of robberies and sexual assaults aimed at university coeds in uptown New Orleans." Block and Barnett have a solution. Let the students carry guns and, for the sake of their safety, get rid of signs advertising "gun-free zones" on campus. (11/10/01) http://www.lewrockwell.com/block/block10.html - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 15:05:49 -0700 From: Charles C Hardy <utbagpiper@juno.com> Subject: Tribune report on rules committee meeting Why the Tribune continues to interview the anti-gunners for articles like this--when they weren't even in attendance (or at least did not take the chance to speak)--is beyond me. Also, there is at least one factual error. Under State law, schools may NOT ban guns carried persuant to a state issued CCW permit. Private home owners and churches can ban such weapons. However, it does appear I was quoted more or less correctly. Charles PS, Yes, I am currently doing double duty. I help Janalee with the wagc email list and I am also policy director for GOUtah. http://www.sltrib.com/12122001/utah/157447.htm State Agencies Ordered to Revise Concealed-Weapons Rules Wednesday, December 12, 2001 BY DAN HARRIE THE SALT LAKE TRIBUNE Officials at many state agencies will soon be busy writing new rules to clarify that legally concealed weapons are exempt from dozens of regulations banning guns at locales ranging from child-care centers to state parks. Utah lawmakers called a parade of agency representatives before the Administrative Rules Review Committee on Tuesday and ordered them to revise their rules to comply with state law granting near-universal access to concealed weapons licensees. The action came on the heels of a legal opinion by Attorney General Mark Shurtleff that many state gun rules are illegal, and thus "null and void." State personnel officials, with the consent of Gov. Mike Leavitt, already have agreed to scrap anti-gun rules that now bar legally concealed weapons for all state employees, effective Jan. 1. It appears many agencies will follow suit. The only legislatively authorized bans on concealed weapons are in "secure areas," including airports, courts, correctional facilities, mental health facilities and Olympic venues. Schools and private residences also can bar concealed weapons if they post signs or otherwise notify visitors. Among the more controversial of the doomed gun regulations are those imposed by the state Department of Health on licensed child-care facilities. While Shurtleff acknowledged Tuesday that his initial analysis was wrong and anti-gun rules in place for child-care providers are legal, they still do not apply to legally concealed weapons. House Speaker Marty Stephens, R-Farr West, said the committee was not arguing whether the state's gun laws were right or wrong. "All we look at is whether you [agencies] have statutory authority for these rules." Concealed gun "permit holders can carry anywhere that is not designated a secure area," said Sen. Mike Waddoups, R-Taylorsville. "Schools [and child-care centers] are not designated as secure areas." The Gun Violence Prevention Center of Utah is attempting to change that through a citizens' petition proposing to ban legally concealed weapons in houses of worship and all schools, including child-care facilities and colleges. "Places dedicated and set aside for children are places guns should not be allowed," said Maura Carabello, center executive director. "Most average people would say 'why would you need to take a gun in there - -- why do you need to take a chance of an accident.' " Carabello said legislators appear to be "responding to special interests" and not to the majority will. Several gun-rights activists attended Tuesday's meeting to urge lawmakers to crack down on agencies flouting gun laws. "We are deeply concerned about the number of rules that continue to be in violation of state law," said Charles Hardy, policy director of Gun Owners of Utah. Hardy and others were particularly upset at the University of Utah, which has a strict anti-gun policy, including banning legally concealed weapons for faculty, students, employees and visitors. "The University of Utah continues to thumb its nose at the Legislature and the laws it has passed," Hardy said, adding a citizen in such clear violation of the law would expect harsh punishment. During a separate meeting with Salt Lake County Republican legislators last week, Hardy suggested state fines or penalties against the university, or alternate legislation making school administrators personally liable for violations of law. Other gun activists have suggested enlisting someone to deliberately violate the university's rules in order to provoke enforcement action, then using that as grounds for a lawsuit. Shurtleff said in an interview he intends to meet with university administrators in the next few weeks and discuss his legal opinion regarding anti-gun regulations. He declined to speculate what the consequences might be if they do not back down from their current regulations. U. spokesman Fred Esplin said the school's gun rules will stand "in the absence of some authoritative declaration to the contrary." Esplin said he is not sure why the school is being singled out because "most of the campuses [in the state] have the same, or similar policies." - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 15:17:56 -0700 From: Charles C Hardy <utbagpiper@juno.com> Subject: DesNews Report on rules meeting This is from today's DesNews. This article did not track down anti gunners to comment on a meeting they didn't bother to attend. OTOH, no direct quotes from any progun folks either. Basically, far less info than in the SLTrib article. Please note this sentence carefully and begin to respond appropriately to your legisltors. Utah's gun laws are not broken; we do not need to start adding to the list of places gun can be banned; and the fact that a bad rule has been in place is no excuse to make that rule legal by changing the law. Note that it appears Ure said this before the meeting, but he did hold out distinct possibility of more gun control legislation. "Ure said before the meeting that it appears legislators will take some action on the questionable rules, perhaps repealing some, perhaps including some in the law where guns are restricted by the Legislature." http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,355011800,00.html? Debate begins over Utah gun rules By Bob Bernick Jr. Deseret News political editor The long, and sometimes emotional, debate over reworking or repealing dozens of state rules that "illegally" control the use of firearms started Tuesday. Several state agencies appeared before a legislative oversight committee after Attorney General Mark Shurtleff wrote an informal opinion a month ago finding state agency rules restricting gun possession violated state law. House Speaker Marty Stephens, R-Farr West, said it is not the committee's responsibility to decide if the rules are "right or wrong," rather whether the state agencies had the authority to write the rules in the first place. Clearly, Stephens and Rep. Dave Ure, R-Kamas, the co-chairman of the Administrative Rules Committee, questioned the agencies' authority to do so ù as did Shurtleff. One agency may have dodged a bullet, so to speak. Shurtleff wrote a letter to Rod Betit, executive director of the State Health Department, saying it appears that hundreds of state licensed day-care centers in Utah are defined in state code as "schools," which can make certain rules defining gun use. However, Shurtleff added, day-care licensees must take into account the broad 2nd Amendment rights of legally-permitted concealed weapons owners. That appears to mean the health department can restrict loaded weapons in day-care centers but can't ban concealed weapons from the premises. After hearing several assistant attorneys general speak on behalf of the health department, Sen. Michael Waddoups, R-Taylorsville, said he wrote the state's concealed weapons law and he knows its intent. "The intent is that concealed carry permitholders can carry (their weapons) in any area that is not 'secure.' A school is not a 'secure' area" like a prison, courtroom, mental hospital or airport, Waddoups said. "Why don't you have an exemption in your (day-care) rule for concealed-carry permitholders?" asked Rep. John Swallow, R-Sandy. Health Department officials said they didn't include one because, in writing the rule, they were just listing firearms as another hazard to children's health, like having access to poison or other dangerous materials. The rule says no day-care operator will allow children access to loaded weapons. That's understandable, said Swallow. And department officials said the rule will likely be rewritten to specifically allow legally permitted concealed weapons owners to carryguns into licensed day-care centers. Division of Wildlife Resources officials tried to explain to legislators why they have dozens of rules that ban certain types of guns on certain hunts of animals. But lawmakers didn't want to debate that, saying they are only concerned about whether the division can control permitted concealed weapons on those hunts. Lawmakers will have higher education institutions testify in January to justify policies or rules that ban all guns including legally permitted concealed weapons on state college and university campuses. Ure said before the meeting that it appears legislators will take some action on the questionable rules, perhaps repealing some, perhaps including some in the law where guns are restricted by the Legislature. A month ago Shurtleff issued an informal opinion that said around two dozen rules adopted by various state agencies controlling gun use are illegal. Only the Legislature has the power to regulate guns in Utah, Shurtleff said, a view Stephens and other legislators echoed Tuesday morning. Shurtleff later issued a formal opinion that said the state personnel rule is illegal that prohibits state employees with concealed weapon permits from bringing their guns to work. Gov. Mike Leavitt and his personnel officials agreed and that rule will be rescinded Jan. 1, legislators were told Tuesday. In a gun-related issue, Shurtleff told the Deseret News Monday that rules set up by state Olympic officials that declare the Capitol "gun free" during the February Games are also illegal. The Legislature specifically amended gun control law several years ago to say official Olympic venues can be kept gun free during the Games ù and metal detectors and other security will keep guns out of those venues, SLOC has decided. But lawmakers rejected a bill later that would have made the Capitol itself an Olympic venue. And so, Shurtleff said, state officials can't bar legally-permitted concealed weapons from the Capitol. The Legislature will recess during the two-week Games, but a number of Olympic-related and public events are scheduled in the Capitol at that time. State Olympic officials said they had no plans to ban guns from the Capitol except during visits by President Bush, who is expected to give a speech in the building the night before the Games open, and Vice President Dick Cheney, who may also attend the Games and visit the Capitol. ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. - - ------------------------------ End of utah-firearms-digest V2 #221 ***********************************