From: owner-utah-firearms-digest@lists.xmission.com (utah-firearms-digest) To: utah-firearms-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: utah-firearms-digest V2 #161 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, October 13 1999 Volume 02 : Number 161 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 14:15:47 -0600 From: charles hardy Subject: Shameless plug for campaign support Hello all. I know this is mostly off topic as city councils don't have much direct impact on the gun rights, so delete now if you are terribly bothered by off topic messages. Otherwise, I hoping to find at least a couple people who live in (or close to) Sandy City to help me with my efforts at gaing a seat on the Sandy City Council. Last night I survived my primary race for one of Sandy City's at-large city council seats. Having done so with a reasonably decent showing with nearly 600 votes for some 18% (4th place was down around 11%, 3rd place was at 25%), I intend to make a fairly serious run for office. Two incumbants (Linda Saville and Crickett Ralston), myself, and another challenger (Sylvia Brunsholz) survived the primary. Marilee Guinan did not. Given that my efforts to date have consisted only of getting about 500 half page black-on-white flyers passed out throughout the city, I think I have a decent chance at this one if I can get my name out better. Due to my limited personal resources, this is going to require either some fairly serious donations so I can afford some signs and do mailings or a lot of leg work to pass out more flyers. I plan to make some modest changes to the flyer I used for the primary, and run off a bunch of copies. I may also do up some smaller (8 or even 12 per page) "reminder cards" to remind people of the election and encouraging them to vote. I also plan to get out a few nights and walk some of the neighborhoods making an effort to visit with people as I pass out flyers in addition to simply trying to get as many flyers placed on doors as I can. Several people have volunteered to help with passing out flyers. If anyone else is able and willing to help please let me know. There is no need to visit with anyone while doing this. Flyers can simply go on door steps. I can especially use help on the east side of Sandy heading up the bench and on the west side of the freeway. Also, if anyone has any friends who own small businesses in Sandy (or near Sandy where Sandy residents are likely to do business or drive by) who would be willing to put flyers and/or signs on their property for the next few weeks, that would be a big help. If you know anyone who would be willing and able to make decent yard signs for me either free or at a significantly reduced rate, that would also be a big help. I plan to make a real run, but will not go into debt or significantly adversely affect my family's monthly budget to do so. So this is a small budget race being run mostly on sweat. If there is anyone who would like to help but would rather make phone calls than do leg work, also let me know. I'm going to try to put my hands on a list of registered voters in Sandy and would like to start making phone calls to them to ask them to vote and to vote for me--probably a simple 15 to 30 second message containing my name and asking for their vote. I'd like to target these calls during the day when they can be quickly left on answering machines and not bother anyone during their evening or dinner hours. Finally, if by some chance anyone is in a position to do so and wants to make a financial contribution, I'm more than happy to accept. If anyone would like to donate services in kind (yard signs, photo copies, use of a bulk rate mailing permit and postage, advertising in newsletters, taking a better portrait shot of me for use on flyers, etc) I can also certainly make use of those. I can be reached at this email (no attachments however) or at my home phone number at 523-3817. I do work days so either call evenings or leave me a clear message. Thank you. ================================================================== Charles C. Hardy ___________________________________________________________________ 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: Wed, 06 Oct 99 17:18:00 -0700 From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: ALERT: Volunteers Needed AM of 10/7 In Salt Lake County call Kitty Burton at 254-3834 to volunteer. Jim Dexter's # is 963-1028. - ----- To: lputah@qsicorp.com Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 16:58:52 -0600 Subject: ALERT: Volunteers Needed AM of 10/7 From: "Jim Dexter" The UEA is planning to kick off their 1999 Convention on Thursday, Oct. 7, with a "Walk the Talk" march from the capitol to the Salt Palace in support of their anti-guns in schools and churches petition drive. The LPUtah, in concert with Women against Gun Control and GOUtah!, has prepared a special brochure: "Guns, Children & Schools," which provides the real facts about this topic with unimpeachable sources ranging from John Lott's studies, Gary Kleck's study to Dep't of Justice statistics (the least credible source, of course). We have printed 1500 of those brochures for distribution at the UEA convention and PTA meeting around the state. We need volunteers to hand out brochures to the delegates as they "march" into the Salt Palace on Thursday, 10/7, around 8:00 - 8:30 AM. (The keynote speech is slated to start at 8:45 AM.) Unfortunately, I must go to California to help my parents. (My 85-year-old mother was just hospitalized with a broken leg and my 89-year-old father can't cope.) Also unfortunately, both our state vice chair and state treasurer are out of the country. I will pick up the brochures from the printer tomorrow. If you can volunteer to bring the brochures to the Salt Palace, please let me know ASAP. IF you can be at the Salt Palace from 8:00 to 9:00 on Thursday, please also let me know. We will also notify the media. - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 09:01:30 -0400 From: "Chad Leigh, Pengar Enterprises, Inc. and Shire.Net LLC" Subject: Re: ALERT: Volunteers Needed AM of 10/7 Jim Can you get a few people to make signs etc too? You need to walk along with them with your own signs. Nothing like diffusing the message :-) Chad from NH - --On Wed, Oct 6, 1999 17.18 -0700 SCOTT BERGESON wrote: > > In Salt Lake County call Kitty Burton at 254-3834 to volunteer. > Jim Dexter's # is 963-1028. > > ----- > To: lputah@qsicorp.com > Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 16:58:52 -0600 > Subject: ALERT: Volunteers Needed AM of 10/7 > From: "Jim Dexter" > > The UEA is planning to kick off their 1999 Convention on Thursday, Oct. 7, > with a "Walk the Talk" march from the capitol to the Salt Palace in > support of their anti-guns in schools and churches petition drive. > > The LPUtah, in concert with Women against Gun Control and GOUtah!, has > prepared a special brochure: "Guns, Children & Schools," which provides > the real facts about this topic with unimpeachable sources ranging from > John Lott's studies, Gary Kleck's study to Dep't of Justice statistics > (the least credible source, of course). > > We have printed 1500 of those brochures for distribution at the UEA > convention and PTA meeting around the state. > > We need volunteers to hand out brochures to the delegates as they "march" > into the Salt Palace on Thursday, 10/7, around 8:00 - 8:30 AM. (The > keynote speech is slated to start at 8:45 AM.) > > Unfortunately, I must go to California to help my parents. (My 85-year-old > mother was just hospitalized with a broken leg and my 89-year-old father > can't cope.) Also unfortunately, both our state vice chair and state > treasurer are out of the country. > > I will pick up the brochures from the printer tomorrow. If you can > volunteer to bring the brochures to the Salt Palace, please let me know > ASAP. IF you can be at the Salt Palace from 8:00 to 9:00 on Thursday, > please also let me know. > > We will also notify the media. > > > > - > Pengar Enterprises, Inc. and Shire.Net LLC Web and Macintosh Consulting -- full service web hosting Chad Leigh chad@pengar.com chad@shire.net - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 14:53:52 -0600 From: "S. Thompson" Subject: Dial 911 and Die Dial 911 and Die By Richard W. Stevens Review by Sarah Thompson, M.D. Recent events have focused many people's attention on violent crime. Many people are upset that not a single teacher at Columbine High was prepared to do anything to stop a couple of homicidal and suicidal teenagers. Even more people are outraged that the police sat outside for several hours while innocent students were murdered. Some people wonder why vicious bigots choose places like Los Angeles and Chicago to go on murderous rampages, or why mentally ill criminals are set free to commit further crimes. The answers can be found in a new book by Richard Stevens. _Dial 911 and Die_ is a book that will open your eyes - and possibly even save your life, or the life of someone you love. It should be required reading for anyone who doesn't realize that he has primary, if not sole, responsibility for protecting and defending himself. And it's a wonderful resource for those of us who have accepted that responsibility in the face of overwhelming hostility from the uninformed and politically correct. The premise of the book is simple: the police and the government have, with few exceptions, absolutely no responsibility to protect you, and no responsibility to arrest or incarcerate criminals. You're on your own, and if you depend on the police, you do so at your own risk. Stevens, a practicing attorney, cites cases from every state in the nation, as well as Canada and Puerto Rico, to illustrate this concept. Each case is carefully documented, with a complete citation, as well as an explanation of the laws involved. The cases are shocking and horrifying. If a prospective murderer calls the police and tells them when and where he plans to murder someone, do they have any duty to intervene to prevent the murder? No. Do the police have the obligation to arrest someone who repeatedly violates a domestic violence protective order? No. Can the police ignore an emergency call for assistance in order to do paperwork? Yes. Do the police have the obligation to respond to a 911 call for help? No. What if they promise that "help is on the way"? Do they then have an obligation to respond? Still no. If the police witness a crime in progress, must they intervene to protect the innocent? No again. If a police officer attacks an innocent person, may he be held liable for criminal assault? In most cases, no. As one California court wrote: "police officers have no affirmative statutory duty to do anything." The basis for this is the legal principle of "sovereign immunity", which means that government is immune from liability and has no financial or other responsibility for its actions. Essentially, government and its agents are above the law and may violate it at their own discretion. Another problem is the doctrine of "public duty", i.e. that the police have the duty to protect the "general public", but not the duty to protect individuals. This is in the best tradition of "newspeak" since by definition, the "general public" _excludes_ each and every individual person. For all practical purposes, the police have the duty to protect everyone but the person or persons who need their assistance. Even in the case of riots and civil disturbances, which would seem to fall under the "public duty" rule, the police usually have no duty to protect the affected people or their property. Focusing on liability can be misleading however, and Stevens frequently reminds the reader of this. Even in the rare instances where crime victims retain the right to sue the state for inadequate, negligent or malicious police services, suing the state is a very lengthy and expensive process. And no amount of money can adequately compensate victims of violent crime, or their grieving parents, spouses or children. The more libertarian and anarchic may respond "So what? I don't want or expect the government to protect me; I can do it myself." But can they? While government has no duty to protect people, or even to prevent crime and apprehend criminals, it has arrogated to itself the power to disarm them. Government, especially in crime-ridden cities such as Washington, D.C. and Los Angeles, prohibits citizens from defending themselves, or even possessing the means to do so, while simultaneously refusing to accept responsibility for those it has rendered defenseless. It can, and will, prosecute and imprison courageous, responsible people simply for defending their own lives! (This is the only real "weakness" of the book. I wish Stevens had included cases where citizens were prosecuted for daring to be responsible for their own lives and property.) While _Dial 911 and Die_ focuses primarily on sovereign immunity for law enforcement failures and inadequacies, it illustrates other disturbing problems as well. Just as police have no duty to respond to 911 calls, emergency medical services and fire departments also have no duty to respond to pleas for assistance. Paramedics have no responsibility to respond to calls from sick or injured people and fire departments have no obligation to put out fires. Courts have no duty to process papers correctly, prisons have no duty to actually keep dangerous criminals imprisoned, and mental hospitals have no duty to treat or hold even the criminally insane. Yet all of us are forced to pay taxes to support these services, even though they may refuse to provide anything in return. Only government can get away with willfully refusing to provide the services for which it's paid. Like many city-dwellers who have learned that the police are rarely around when needed, I have an alarm system in my home. Should my alarm go off, the alarm company would certainly be liable if it failed to respond because "everyone was at lunch". Yet the police have no duty to respond. I also have a fire extinguisher in my home. If a fire started and the extinguisher malfunctioned, I could sue the company for damages. But the fire department can choose to let my house burn with impunity. If a doctor in an emergency room refused to treat a patient with chest pains, he would almost certainly be sued - unless, of course, it happened at a government hospital. But paramedics have no duty to respond to 911 calls. Isn't it interesting that a person is a "responsible citizen" if he keeps a cell phone, a fire extinguisher, and a first aid kit handy, but is presumed to be a criminal if he keeps a loaded firearm available for self-defense? Yet all are essentially tools for responding to emergencies that threaten life, limb, or property, and all should be held in the same high regard. Even if a person is willing and prepared to accept responsibility for protecting himself and his family, there are limits to what he can do. Maybe he can repel, or disable, criminal predators. But can he put out a fire by himself? Can he adequately treat a heart attack, broken neck, or other serious medical problems himself? What about people who aren't physically or mentally capable of using a firearm? Should they be abandoned to violent predators? _Dial 911 and Die_ is a compelling argument for restoring the individual right of self-defense. But it's also a compelling argument for reforming, if not revoking, the legal doctrines of "sovereign immunity" and "public duty", or for privatizing emergency services. Have you ever encountered uninformed advocates of gun control who insist that, "No one needs a gun because the police will protect you"? Have you tried to educate such people by pointing out that guns save far more lives than are lost to accidents and murder, only to have them respond with, "Name one!"? If so, _Dial 911_ will also prove to be an invaluable resource. Stevens includes an excellent section explaining various legal doctrines as well as legal terms such as duty, liability, immunity etc. He also explains legal citations so that you can locate and explore the cases and statutes he discusses in more depth. And because the cases are organized by state, it's easy to find your state laws, and find actual cases to share with legislators and other government officials. In addition, the book includes forty-five stories, drawn from newspaper reports, of armed civilians who successfully defended themselves or others from violent criminals. Considering how rarely newspapers report such incidents, this is a prodigious research effort in itself! If you don't keep a firearm for self-defense, "Dial 911 and Die" should convince you to do so. If you already are prepared to defend yourself, this book will provide you with the ammunition you need to preserve, or restore, your right to do so. Buy a copy of _Dial 911 and Die_ for yourself. But more important, buy copies for friends and relatives who still believe the police will protect them. If it saves just one life, it's worth it! _Dial 911 and Die_ is available from Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (JPFO), http://www.jpfo.org/dial911anddie.htm. =A9 1999 Sarah Thompson, M.D. http://www.therighter.com Permission is granted for reproduction, individual distribution or posting of this column as long as no changes are made, full attribution is given and this message is left intact. If you have questions, please contact agent@therighter.com. - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Oct 99 11:17:00 -0700 From: scott.bergeson@ucs.org (SCOTT BERGESON) Subject: FW: EFFECTIVE LOBBYING - ----- To: 2ndamendmentnews@onelist.com From: "Weldon Clark" Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 20:10:42 -0400 Subject: [2ndamendmentnews] EFFECTIVE LOBBYING EFFECTIVE LOBBYING Third in a series. Next is Running Campaigns and Unregistering Your Gun. See below. Oppose and defeat the Juvenile Justice Bill Call your representatives at the US Capitol Switchboard at 888-449-3511 or at 202-224-3121. E-mail link to Congress: http://in-search-of.org/ http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/ http://www.gunowners.org/mailerx.html See newly revised www.2ndamendment.net Legislative updates: http://www.nealknox.com go to "Scripts from the Firearms Coalition Legislative Update Line" BASIC PRINCIPLE - Gun laws do not prevent criminals from getting firearms. Criminals do not obey laws. In fact, the disarming of honest citizens makes crime worse. Therefore, additional firearm restrictions are bad and fewer restrictions are good. Anti-gun media people and politicians do not wish to control your firearms. They wish to destroy your firearms. PURPOSE - Your purpose is to protect the individual's right to keep and bear arms. The best way to defend your own rights is to defend the rights of others. This means achieving positive legislative results. Your job as an activist is to (A) stop bad legislation from passing and (B) get good legislation passed. The job is not to make a particular person or politician happy. NECESSARY PREREQUISITES - You must be willing to spend your own time, energy and money to do this work. First, go to your local library and copy all of the state and federal firearm laws and place then in a notebook with separators and labels. Read and understand all of these laws. Next be a member of a firearms organization in your state - preferably one that has a range and a large, stable, active membership. Make sure you can mail to this membership. Get to be the organization's legislative officer. Get from your state capital a roster of the state legislators with their HOME and office addresses and phone numbers. Print up this roster in a handy folded to fit shirt pocket form. Pass these out at gun clubs and include in a mailing to members at least once per year. Politicians respond primarily to THOSE IN THEIR DISTRICTS who can vote for or against them. Get a copy of your state's rules for both the senate and house. Know these rules. ACTIVATING FIREARMS OWNERS - Only when it is absolutely necessary must you try to get a large number of your fellow gun owners to contact their representatives by the use of an EXPENSIVE mailing. However, when it is necessary, the mailing should contain your cover letter describing the position you believe they should take with their legislators and a roster of the legislators to be contacted. Your letter must be true, strong and motivational. Anger and fear should be in your letter to your firearm owner friends. You must get them to act. They will act but you cannot get them to do this very often. PRINCIPLE OF LEGISLATIVE DIRECTION - Bad legislation restricts firearm owners further in a particular jurisdiction. Good legislation restricts firearm owners less in that particular jurisdiction. Legislation that is good in a very restrictive state is bad is a far less restrictive state. People who have not lived in a very restrictive state do not understand this. The legislative rules are as follows: 1. Stopping bad legislation is the FIRST PRIORITY. A. Use numerical strength where it exists in either house or in either committee. B. Get amendments attached to make the bill less likely to pass. C. If nothing else works, get a lot of amendments adopted to soften the legislation. Firearm owners who have never lived in a very restrictive state do not understand this. An example is a bill to follow private sales in a state I formerly resided. Friends in the state Senate amended this bad bill that had passed the house. This meant that the bill had to go back to the house and pass with the amendments. In the mean time I personally called 180 members of my gun club and the bill failed in the house by 2 votes out of a 141-member house. A word of caution here. You do not want to amend the bill to make it acceptable to more of the members of the general assembly. You wish to make the bill unacceptable to anti-gun legislators. The object is to kill the bill. 2. Passing good legislation is the SECOND PRIORITY; however when no attack is present pursue good legislation. A. Write the bill so that it will be perceived as practical legislation. Read the present law and get a lawyer friend to help. Run it by others. A dream bill that goes nowhere wastes resources and your creditability. THE PERFECT IS THE ENEMY OF THE GOOD. B. Use numerical strength where it exists in either house or committee. C. Get amendments attached to make the bill more likely to pass. D. If the politicians insist on garbaging up the bill, stop or soften any of these amendments you can. However get the bill passed. E. PRINCIPLE OF GRADUALISM - Use the gradualism approach. Year after year pass good bills. People who have never lived in a very restrictive state do not understand this. A lot of members think NRA is responsible for the final wording of a bill. This is not necessarily true. Mistakes can be made by local activists who are not politically savvy or more likely by NRA-ILA's liaisons. YOUR FRIENDS CAN DO TO YOU WHAT YOUR ENEMIES CANNOT. However opposition politicians do the most damage. F. DO NO HARM - You have no moral right to appease the anti-gun politicians and media. Do not preemptively surrender, or decide which aspect of our Second Amendment right should be gutted in trade for advancing or not gutting some other aspect. Do not support "tolerable" unconstitutional gun controls to appear reasonable, or in return for a sucker promise to back off on other gun controls. Unfortunately over the years NRA has done this at times. In 1988 they made a compromise to get the Maryland roster board that now decides what handguns can be sold in Maryland. The NRA State Liaison called me late at night to tell me AFTER the fact. I wrote and helped bring to a vote the Maryland referendum to try to stop the law from going into effect. This failed because of the police raid on the headquarters of the Maryland Committee Against the Gun Ban the night before the election. The TV stations left the voters with the impression the pro-gun side was doing something illegal. (The anti-gun politicians used the tactics of the Nazis in Germany in the 1930s.) COMMUNICATING WITH POLITICIANS - Do not try to communicate with the politicians who are the enemies of firearm ownership. You do not want to waste your time and damage our cause by educating the enemy. Do all your communication with the politicians in that political body who are in favor of firearm ownership. Testify at each hearing where an anti-gun bill is being considered. Arrive early and sign up before anyone else. Stay late and talk to the politicians who are on your side in the committee. A friend on the committee can do our cause a world of good. GOOD ARGUMENTS - Your idea of a good argument and what works are different. The ideas that work on anti-gun bills are pointing out those things in the bill that can work an injustice on the average citizen. Your committee testimony should be written for reference. But only say what others have not said ahead of you. Repetition will not work with committee members. FOLLOW THE BILL - It is up to you to know the legislative schedule and obtain timely copies of all bills affecting firearm owners. You must think ahead and have the information beforehand. Anti-gun bills are not dead until the legislative session ends. Pro-gun bills are not completed until signed by the Governor. To subscribe reply to me at luz.clark@prodigy.net or behanna@fast.net - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 20:44:31 -0600 From: Karl Peterson Subject: Re: GOUtah! Opposes Teachers as Cops Proposal by USSC While I would not like to be a sworn peace officer with powers of arrest, I would like to be able to carry a concealed weapon on campus if I have a Concealed Carry Permit. I would even welcome an opportunity to get high level training in the use of the weapon from professional police trainers. I would especially love it if the State would admit they they cannot afford to hire enough police officers to put one in every school, so they offer to pay teachers to get the training and furnish them with an appropriate weapon to keep locked in a combo box in a locked drawer of their desk and get regular supervised paid practice in its' use at a commercial or police range. I could get to it in my drawer in an emergency a lot faster than the average Police response time, and my students would be unable to get to it. As it stands right now, I believe that I would be in violation of my contract and subject to immediate dismissal if I carried a concealed weapon to school even if I had a Permit. The only armed individual at my school that I am aware of is a single in-school police officer, and he is not on-campus all the time. To know if he is there all you would have to do is check his clearly marked parking space... I was in a real "weapon in the school" lockdown last year. We spent almost an hour and a half in lock down with absolutely no information for the first hour. Turned out that it was a reported knife in the subdivision next to the school. I had a lot of time to think and stress about how I would defend myself and my students if an armed intruder came through my locked door. The answer I came up with it that I would be unable to do anything except throw things or myself at him. This year my door has a window in it so that he wouldn't even have to break down the door to get in, just break or shoot out the glass and reach in to open the handle. Given the well documented fact that police officers have no statutory duty to protect anyone from anything. Given that I am willing to receive training so that I can protect myself and my students from an armed intruder who enters our "gun free zone", I would hope that you would support me and lobby for me to be able to Carry at school with the proper permits. I am an NRA Life Member and an NRA Certified Instructor in all Rifle and Shotgun disciplines. I have worked as a Rangemaster and have trained literally over a thousand young people how to shoot with accuracy, precision and safety. I am a nine bar Sharpshooter with rifle and a Sharpshooter with Shotgun. I own a pistol, but it is a bit too big for concealed carry. On a teachers salary, a concealable weapon with laser sights which I would want to have is just too expensive. Thank you for your time and consideration. - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 10:02:03 -0600 From: "David Sagers" Subject: CCW Renewal Almost learned something the hard way. BCI changed their policy and no = longer sends out renewal forms for CCW permits. If yours has expired you = have a 30 grace period to apply for renewal. Applications for renewal are available at http://www.bci.state.ut.us/ or call CI at 965-4484 - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 10:33:49 -0700 From: Joe Waldron Subject: SUPREME COURT DECLINES SECOND AMENDMEN CASE This will undoubtedly cause a lot of furor and have the gun grabbers crowing (unjustifiably, IMHO). Keep in mind the SC did two things here: it said it didn't want a case involving convicted felons to be the determiner of whether the Second Amendment protects an individual right, and it said police officers are not a "protected category" and thus not subject to the same laws as the common people.=20 Joe Waldron =20 Court Avoids Gun Rights Ruling=20 By Richard Carelli Associated Press Writer Tuesday, Oct. 12, 1999; 10:27 a.m. EDT WASHINGTON =96=96 The Supreme Court today shot down an appeal in which two Louisiana men said the Constitution's Second Amendment gives them and all Americans a personal right to own a gun.=20 The court, without comment, thwarted the two men from owning hunting rifles because they were convicted of serious, but nonviolent, tax crimes.=20 "The time is now ripe for this court to squarely confront the issue the Second Amendment creates a personal right in favor of individual citizens," the justices were told.=20 The amendment states: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bar arms, shall not be infringed."=20 In separate action, the court rejected a challenge to a federal law that prohibits anyone =96 including police officers =96 from possessing a gun after being convicted of a domestic-violence crime.=20 In that case, the justices turned away, without comment, arguments by the Fraternal Order of Police that Congress lacks the authority to set qualifications for state and local police.=20 Neither of today's actions set any legal precedent. The nation's highest court has ruled only once =96 in 1939 =96 directly on the scope of the amendment, long a hotly debated issue in the political fight over gun control.=20 The court 60 years ago ruled there is no right to own a sawed-off shotgun in the absence of "some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia."=20 The appeal in the Louisiana case had been filed in behalf of James Kostmayer Jr. and Robert Lawson Jr., avid hunters who have been barred from purchasing rifles because of their federal tax convictions.=20 Kostmayer, a construction industry manager, was sentenced to 10 months in prison and three years probation after pleading guilty in 1994 to conspiring to defraud the government over taxes. Lawson, a certified public accountant, pleaded guilty in 1993 to submitting a false federal=20 tax form and was sentenced to two years probation.=20 Their lawyers say Louisiana has restored "full rights of citizenship" to both men, including the right to own and possess guns. But a federal law makes it a crime for convicted felons to "possess ... any firearm or ammunition."=20 After the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms refused to grant the two men any relief from the law, they sued. Their lawsuit contended, among other things, that applying the law to them violates their Second Amendment rights.=20 A federal judge and the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against them.=20 "No rational basis exists for concluding that a construction executive and=20 a CPA endanger society when hunting ducks," their Supreme Court appeal said.=20 But government lawyers urged the justices to reject the appeal.=20 The second case had its roots in a 1968 federal law barring convicted felons from owning or possessing a gun. The law contains an exception for federal, state and local government officials.=20 In 1996, Congress extended the gun ban to anyone convicted of a domestic-violence misdemeanor. That amendment contained no exception for government officials.=20 The FOP sued in federal court, saying the 1996 law violated the Constitution's 10th Amendment by encroaching on states' authority to establish qualifications for their gun-carrying police officers.=20 A federal judge and three-judge panel of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upheld the 1996 law.=20 The cases are Kostmayer vs. Department of Treasury, 99-71, and Fraternal Order of Police vs. U.S., 99-106.=20 =A9 Copyright 1999 The Associated Press - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 10:58:13 -0600 From: "David Sagers" Subject: Fwd: More good news on Orrin Hatch Received: from wvc ([204.246.130.34]) by icarus.ci.west-valley.ut.us; Wed, 13 Oct 1999 09:35:53 -0600 Received: from THIOKOL.COM by wvc (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id JAA05515; Wed, 13 Oct 1999 09:22:20 -0600 Received: from UTAH-Message_Server by THIOKOL.COM with Novell_GroupWise; Wed, 13 Oct 1999 09:36:37 -0600 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.2 Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 09:35:58 -0600 From: "Neil W. Sagers" To: Dsagers@ci.west-valley.ut.us, UTAH.Inet#c#xmission.com#c#ajgaunt@THIOKOL.COM Subject: More good news on Orrin Hatch Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Received: from adobe ([146.168.4.20]) by gw2.thiokol.com; Wed, 13 Oct 1999 08:20:36 -0600 Received: from hermes.gcscatt.com ([12.63.159.4]) by adobe.thiokol.com; = Wed, 13 Oct 1999 08:18:58 +0000 (MST) Received: from m5.boston.juno.com (m5.boston.juno.com [205.231.100.197]) by hermes.gcscatt.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA02400 for ; Wed, 13 Oct 1999 10:18:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from clc.slc.ut@juno.com) by m5.boston.juno.com (queuemail) id ENTL9D7F; Wed, 13 Oct 1999 10:16:26 = EDT To: colibrimx5@efortress.com, BaileyM@ang.af.mil, BLACKIN@THIOKOL.COM, Glenb@xmission.com, dcollett@ditell.com, JGILL@farmcredit.com, Dave.Hankwitz@gw.osullivan.com, jmichael@doit.state.in.us, skychief36@hotmail.com, brouse@sprintmail.com, drosati@snet.net, MCMS99@aol.com Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 07:23:49 -0700 Subject: Fw: Fw: This is strange stuff Message-ID: <19991013.081213.-309379.2.clc.slc.ut@juno.com> X-Mailer: Juno 2.0.11 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-7,9,11-18,20-21,23-26,28-29,31-32,34,36,38,40-43,45-4= 6,48,50,52,54-56,58-63,65-67,69,71-72,74,76-78,80,82-86,88-90,92-107 X-Juno-Att: 0 From: connie l carlson Well, some interesting reading, for whatever it is worth.............. > I have a backlog of mail I've been slogging through. This little ditty was mailed to me and a bunch of other Texas Republicans on September 27: > > -------------------------------------- > > My name is Jack Thompson. I am the last Republican to run against Janet Reno, as I was her opponent in 1988 for the office of Dade County (Florida) State Attorney. > > One of the reasons I ran against Reno was the fact that she was blackmailed by a criminal pornography enterprise. I gave the proof in my campaign. > > I also provided to Bill Clinton, before he even nominated her to be Attorney General (I heard from a friend in the Justice Department that she was on the "short list" of nominees), not only the proof of her blackmail but also the evidence of her five drunk driving incidents, her use of call girls, and her disturbing ties to organized crime. > > I gave this information to Clinton through my best friend at Vanderbilt Law School, Class of 1976, an attorney by the name of M. Samuel Jones, who by then was a partner to Bruce Lindsey in the Little Rock firm of Wright, Lindsey & Jennings. Confirmation that Clinton got all the information that disqualified Reno from practicing law, let alone being the AG, came in a phone call from someone at the White House before her confirmation hearings who wanted to know all that I knew. His name? Lanny Davis. Davis clearly wanted to know what I knew not to disqualify her but to discredit me should it all hit the fan in public. This was the beginning of my education about the ways of Washington and of the political elite of both parties who protect themselves rather than the interests of the American people. > > I say that because now I am writing letters to Senator Danforth to ask him to subpoena me to testify in his "investigation" of what happened at Waco and its aftermath in order that his team might consider the fact that Reno had a powerful disincentive to get to the bottom of Waco. The disincentive is, of course, the blackmail information that the President has on Reno.=20 It is how he has kept her on line on Chinagate and every other "gate" for which she has proven so useful. > > The reason Danforth won't want to get into that is the complicity of the Senate Republicans in assuring that Reno became A.G. Orrin Hatch, for example, knew of the five police officers who pulled her over for drunk driving while she was State Attorney down here. How do I know? > > Because his Judiciary Committee staffer, John Bliss, told me that Hatch had the police officers but did not want to go public with them because "The Senate Republicans don't want to mess with the Anita Hill crowd again." > > So, folks, there you have it: Danforth won't get to the bottom of Waco, which means getting to the bottom of the cover-up, because to do so exposes the Republicans as complicit in the Waco disaster. They knew Reno was a drunk and a compromised one at that, who could be controlled with this and other information by the extortionate White House, and yet they sat on their hands at the moment that she could have been denied the post. > > Orrin Hatch has the blood of 24 kids on his hands. I have told all this to Danforth, and he won't even have his people talk to me. I said this on Fox News Channel on Labor Day while being interviewed about Waco, and the interviewer freaked and pulled the plug on the interview. > > Fox News, if you're wanting to do something, should be inundated with calls asking me to be interviewed in depth about this. And Danforth should be pressured to talk to me. > > I leave it in your hands. I have tried everything to get this word out. > > I can testify to all of this under oath, and I have witnesses to corroborate it all. > > But America will not know the truth about Waco until it knows that Reno was picked by Clinton to be his firewall between all his criminality and accountability for it. > > Jack Thompson, > 305-666-4366 > Jackpeace@aol.com > > > ________________________________________________________________ Get free e-mail you don't need Web access to use -- Or get full, reliable Internet access from Juno Web! Download your free software today: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagh. - - ------------------------------ End of utah-firearms-digest V2 #161 ***********************************