From: owner-utah-firearms-digest@lists.xmission.com (utah-firearms-digest) To: utah-firearms-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: utah-firearms-digest V2 #181 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, February 23 2000 Volume 02 : Number 181 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2000 06:18:53 -0700 From: Scott Bergeson Subject: FW: Project Exile Concerns - ----- Subject: Fwd: Project Exile Concerns Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2000 13:15:24 -0700 From: "Arnold J. Gaunt" The following message comes from my long-time associate Russ Howard. In it he provides an alternative perspective on the NRA's much promoted "Project Exile". I believe his points regarding the likely abuse of innocent gun owners are well-founded. In fact, as I noted in a previous posting, already Exile supporter Senator Hatch laments the fact that so few people have been prosecuted by Janet Reno for mere possession of "semiautomatic assault weapons" (i.e. traditional firearms useful for defense of self and family). Let us not fall into a trap. Arnold - ----- Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2000 14:25:48 -0800 From: CR Howard To those getting this for the 3rd time; My condolences. My computer seems to have something against letting me say "Editor, WorldNetDaily" - -- at least in the saved version. Some of you seem to be getting what I wrote, then Editor, WorldNetDaily, From David M. Bresnahan's Feb. 8, 2000 WorldNetDaily article, Congressman gives away free guns: "What's it going to solve?" asked NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre regarding the Clinton-Gore proposal to license gun owners. "The criminals could care less. They're not going to stand in line; they won't comply with it," he said. The NRA has warned that Clinton's proposal to track every gun and bullet used in a crime means that all guns will be registered. So true. But then why, should these new laws pass, does LaPierre want to enforce them? Through "Project Exile," LaPierre wants to "enforce existing gun laws" with "zero tolerance" and a 5-year stay in the Federal Gulags that he's helping build -- despite the unconstitutionality of most existing gun laws and our bitter struggles against their enactment. Predictably, Clinton & Co. are buying in: "Enforce existing gun laws, huh? Hey, that sounds pretty good. How about 500 more ATF agents?" (Which, of course, LaPierre had to swallow, though as usual he didn't seem to mind). Anti-gun enthusiasm for Project Gun Gulag should be no surprise, considering that LaPierre partnered with the likes of anti-gun Philadelphia Mayor Ed Rendell to grease this sucker deal. And yet, this from the "NRA Winning Team" web site: Readers of the FAX Alert may be surprised to read about the latest politician taking credit for "Project Exile." A Buffalo News article (8/10/99) quoted none other than Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), as saying, "Before Project Exile, committing a crime with an illegal gun could mean only a slap on the wrist. But now those wrists are slapped with handcuffs." (CREDIT WHERE CREDIT IS DUE? NRA­ILA FAX ALERT, Vol. 6, No. 32, 8/20/99) Actually, only a cretin should be surprised by any of this, including NRA's "surprise" that the enemy is wholeheartedly jumping on their bandwagon. Can anyone truly believe that Schumer doesn't see this as a vehicle to turn decent gun owners into political prisoners, one by one? Is NRA's "Winning" Team really that dense, or, like the corrupt police official in Casablanca, are they "shocked, shocked, to discover that there is gambling in this institution" (as they collect their winnings)? I've little doubt that when pressed, LaPierre will say something like, "I meant real criminals; you know, violent felons." But while LaPierre's "Winning Team" drones the "enforcement" chant, they rarely bother limiting the focus of Project Exile propaganda to previously-convicted criminals; even more rarely to felons or violent criminals. Not that these finer distinctions would help anyway. "Convicted Criminals," or "Convicted Felons" will include victimless gun criminals -- decent folks who get busted for CCW or refusing to turn in "illegal" guns, then get busted again after doing their time. And as gun laws become increasingly complex and numerous, decent Americans will become victims of Project Gulag due to unknowing, unintentional violations. Moreover, since anti-gunners are designing and implementing Project Exile, even the phrase "Violent Criminals" will include decent, victimless offenders. For example, say the police come to confiscate your "assault weapon," which respectable sport shooter Charlton Heston says you have no legitimate reason to own. Maybe you're not enthusiastic enough about giving it up. Maybe you even mouth off something about your "rights." Let's assume you're luckier than Don Scott, the Weavers, and the little kiddies at Waco, so the police merely beat you and claim you attacked them. Besides being convicted of a gun "crime," you're also convicted of a "violent crime" -- resisting arrest, assaulting an officer, or some such charge. Later, after doing time, you're arrested & convicted for exercising your "inalienable human right" to carry for self-defense, and you do 5 years in the Gun Gulag on Strike 2. Later still, "free" again, you get your 3rd strike for incorrigibly exercising your "RKBA." Thanks again to LaPierre's "Winning" Team -- big supporters of 3 Victimless Crimes & You're Out, massive prison-building programs, and other cornerstones of the Police State and the Prison Industrial Complex -- you go to the Gun Gulag for life. Here. In America. As a political prisoner. Even though you never hurt a soul. It doesn't matter what LaPierre's "Winning" Team really meant by "enforce existing gun laws." The mindless, simpleton chant is what's catching on. Perhaps NRA's "Winning" Team merely was not careful what it wished for or how it wished for it. But they pried open Pandora's Box, and the focus of what comes out will not be limited to "real" criminals. Project Exile will be used against all citizens who violate gun laws, and it will work the way the anti-gunners want it to. So when they pass gun owner registration (as if we don't largely have it already thanks to Heston's Gun Control Act of 1968), LaPierre will help enforce it. Isn't it wonderful? We fight new laws today, help the police state enforce them tomorrow. And if LaPierre is really worried about registration, why is he pushing InstaCheck rather than an alternative program that would enable dealers to check backgrounds without the government knowing who's buying guns? Of course, the government is not supposed to keep background check records. That would be wrong! But it was wrong when the government murdered Don Scott, then shot little Sammy Weaver in the back and sent a sniper to kill his infant-carrying mother, then machine-gunned, crushed, gassed, and incinerated scores of men, women and children at a religious retreat, then whitewashed and covered it up, cheered on by bloodthirsty, newsmedia ratings-whores. The perpetrators were never punished. Instead, they received extensive public approbation, and they are in charge of InstaCheck. Does LaPierre believe that murderers would think twice about keeping records of gun buyers? What are they afraid of, the law? Far as they're concerned, they are the law. "Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?", asked Juvenal, some two millennia past. "But who shall guard the guards?" Isn't that why the Framers wanted the People to be the guards? To be primarily responsible for our own defense and the defense of our families and communities, and not to delegate these basic rights and responsibilities? Over the generations since our right to self-defense was paid for in blood, we foolishly ignored Franklin and Washington, trading liberty for an illusion of safety; hiring a dangerous servant and getting a fearful master. To score quickly forgotten public relations points, or to appease our oppressors, should we help expand the Police State and the Prison Industrial Complex, leaders of which will surely come to view the unorganized militia as a political threat, citizen self-defense as an economic threat, and victimless criminals as resources? Shouldn't we be trying to reverse this secular mistake, the incremental quitclaiming of our ultimate power? Shouldn't we delegate to or share with government only those functions which enhance our ability to defend ourselves, withholding those which supplant it? Shouldn't we aim to become the guards again? Russ Howard 1995-97, NRA Director (resigned) 1992-95, Executive Director, Citizens Against Corruption 1993-94, Executive Director, Roberti Recall - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2000 06:36:36 -0700 From: Scott Bergeson Subject: FW: Free Weaponry! - ----- Subject: Free Weaponry! Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2000 20:10:23 -0500 From: "John A. Quayle" To: Liberty-and-Justice@mailbox.by.net TUESDAY FEBRUARY 8, 2000 Congressman gives away free guns... Campaign to draw attention to Second Amendment website. By David M. Bresnahan © 2000 WorldNetDaily.com SALT LAKE CITY, Utah -- While Republican lawmakers flesh out their positions on President Clinton's aggressive new gun control proposals, one congressman is dealing with the issue by giving away free guns. Rep. Chris Cannon, R-Utah, spent part of this past weekend giving away two handguns in a free drawing at the "Crossroads of the West" gun show in Salt Lake City, Utah. It was his way of letting people know about his new website, eConservativeCoalition.com, which, Cannon says, "is dedicated to supporting your gun rights." Actively calling out to the 15,000 attendees at the gun show as they passed by his booth, Cannon asked, "Would you like to enter our free drawing? We're giving away a couple of guns. Win a PPK." As passersby filled out the entry form, Cannon gave them a copy of the Second Amendment on a business card, along with his website's address. According to Cannon's website, the Second Amendment was added to the Constitution to provide important protections for every citizen. These include protection from foreign and domestic threats, as well as to provide for the right to self-protection, protection of family, and to protect private property. Clinton announced plans for sweeping new gun regulations in his State of the Union address. Plans include requiring a photo ID license for all handgun owners. He also announced plans to have the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms begin a major investigation of gun dealers, and a federal grant for "smart gun" technology. The problem, said Cannon, is that Clinton is going after guns, not criminals. "You know what he's doing? He really got stung by the NRA and their campaign to crack down on illegal gun owners. He won't do that. He won't go after the guys who are doing the crimes," said Cannon in an interview with WorldNetDaily. Cannon's website, designed both to educate and rally support on the Second Amendment, says that "by forming a wide variety of strategic relationships, we work to provide both a local and national infrastructure through which groups and gun advocates, and those who are interested in maintaining their personal freedom, can better communicate and coordinate their efforts." The president's new plan to investigate gun dealers is the "most comprehensive overview ever of the firearms industry." He said a recent study points to 1.2 percent of all gun dealers being responsible for 57 percent of all gun crime traces by the BATF. The National Rifle Association, however, was quick to point out that the study was completed last year by Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., with flawed data. Indeed, both the BATF and the Congressional Research Service stated at the time of Schumer's study, which relied on BATF gun-tracing data, that the statistics were not used correctly. "The [B]ATF tracing system is an operational system designed to help law enforcement agencies identify the ownership path of individual firearms. It was not designed to collect statistics....[B]ATF does not always know if a firearm being traced has been used in a crime... [A trace can occur] for any reason. No crime need be involved," explained the Congressional Research Service in a report. In short, the statistics used by Clinton cannot be used to conclude that gun dealers have supplied guns to criminals, according to the NRA. "I guess that begs the question that if authorities suspect some gun dealers of wrongdoing, why haven't they already been investigated?" asked NRA lobbyist James Baker. He explained that the federal government licenses gun dealers and gives the BATF authority to investigate and prosecute, any time existing federal gun laws have been broken. "Now, the administration has a plan to drive gun dealers out of business through arbitrary regulation. The administration has a plan to drive gun makers out of business with taxpayer-funded junk lawsuits. The administration has a plan to license law-abiding gun owners. The only group the administration doesn't have a plan for dealing with is armed criminals," said Baker. Since Clinton took office in 1992, said Baker, the number of federally licensed gun dealers has been reduced by almost two thirds. The most recent announcement by Clinton to have the BATF crack down on gun dealers is just another attempt to reduce the number of dealers still further, he said. "The White House is apparently targeting gun dealers who sell, in the administration's opinion, too many guns. They are also going after dealers who don't sell enough guns. I think it would end a lot of confusion if the White House just told federally licensed dealers how many guns they should be selling," said Baker. 'This is all beside the fact that the administration's entire initiative perpetuates the deceptive misuse of BATF trace data contrary to the repeated cautioning of both BATF and the Congressional Research Service.' Cannon agrees. "The president wants to go after guns, not criminals. That's his emphasis." His http://eConservativeCoalition.com website adds: "The wisdom of our Founding Fathers is evident every day by the peace we enjoy as a community and by the fact that no invading army has ever made a significant insurgence on United States soil." It also warns that opposing forces are trying to destroy the Second Amendment "under the pretense of safety." The site claims support from the NRA, Gun Owners of America, the Second Amendment Foundation, Women Against Gun Control and other organizations. Janalee Tobias, president of Women Against Gun Control, also at the Salt Lake City gun show, criticized the Clinton proposals. "He's throwing marshmallows at the problem. If he wants to throw hardballs he should concentrate on what's causing the crime," said Tobias. Echoing the popular bumper sticker, she intoned, "Guns don't kill people. We all know it's the person pulling the trigger. I just took another gun class and found out they did a study where they dropped a gun 300 feet. It doesn't go off. You have to pull the trigger." What government needs to concentrate on, said Tobias, is "the people who pull the trigger." Vice President Al Gore announced his support for licensing gun owners during a campaign stop in Boston recently. He said he would mandate full, gun-owner licensing for all firearms purchases and ownership. "What's it going to solve?" asked NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre regarding the Clinton-Gore proposal to license gun owners. "The criminals could care less. They're not going to stand in line; they won't comply with it," he said. The NRA has warned that Clinton's proposal to track every gun and bullet used in a crime means that all guns will be registered. In addition to licensing and registration, the president also reiterated his call for $10 million to be set aside as grant money for firearm manufacturers to develop "smart guns" -- research that is already being done by a number of manufacturers, and has been for several years. The NRA says Clinton is using this grant money and the threat of lawsuits to control gun manufacturers. "Clinton's proposal is not only an unnecessary waste of federal money, but even one of the most rabid anti-gun organizations, the Violence Policy Center, has stated opposition to such a proposal, noting this technology '...cannot decrease gun homicides or suicides....' Of course," says an NRA statement, "while Clinton offers industry this proposed taxpayer-subsidized research, he continues to hold over their heads the very real threat of taxpayer-subsidized lawsuits." David M. Bresnahan is an investigative journalist for WorldNetDaily.com, Inc. This page was last built 2/7/00; 11:00:31 PM Direct corrections and technical inquiries to webmaster@worldnetdaily.com Please direct news submissions to news@worldnetdaily.com _______________________________________________ Liberty-and-Justice mailing list Liberty-and-Justice@mailbox.by.net http://mailbox.by.net/mailman/listinfo/liberty-and-justice - - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2000 15:18:24 -0700 From: Scott Bergeson Subject: FW: Re: NRA lost direction - ----- Subject: Re: NRA lost direction Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2000 14:50:47 -0700 From: "Arnold J. Gaunt" XXXX, Despite Senator Hatch's disclaimers to the contrary, the record demonstrates that he sponsored or supported anti-gun-owner amendments to S. 254. They include: Self Defense Lock Up Hatch/Kohl Amendment No. 352 (Vote No. 122, CR S5382-S5383) http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d106:SP00352: This amendment mandates that trigger locks (or gun safes) be included with every handgun sold. This may seem like a good idea, until it is more fully considered. Increases the cost of every handgun, without provable benefit. Will not affect irresponsible persons, who will not use or will discard the trigger locks. Will not stop juvenile killers, who can easily obtain access to the gun with a key, or if thwarted by a lock, by purchasing a firearm on the black market. Locks are dangerous to use on loaded firearms. Locks do not make an unloaded firearm any more safe. Flies in the face of greatly reduced firearms accidents over the last twenty years. This improvement has occurred without "assistance" from the Government, now being sponsored by Senator Hatch. Concedes the false argument of our enemies that gun owners are irresponsible and should have federal mandates placed on them. Do you store your firearms irresponsibly and need the government to force you to buy a trigger lock? Opens the door to European style gun control, where firearms must be locked up at all times unless being used at the range or while hunting. Having a loaded firearm available for self defense is against the law there. Once every gun owner has a trigger lock, then a future Congress can mandate that all guns must be locked inside the home. Shifts blame from burglars, robbers, and killers to law abiding gun owners. Creates liability for those who keep unlocked guns available for self defense in their homes. This last point deserves additional discussion. Senator Hatch claims that the reason he supports this legislation is to reduce liability for persons whose guns are stolen. In fact, it does this only for handguns that have a trigger lock on them or were locked in a safe. So, if you are in your home and are knocked unconscious by an intruder who then steals and commits a crime with your unlocked handgun, expect to have insult added to injury when you face a civil liability suit for being "irresponsible". Another insidious aspect of the Hatch/Kohl plan pertains to homeowners' insurance. To avoid excessive liability exposure, it may be necessary for insurance companies to require all firearms to be locked as a prerequisite to issuance of a policy. The homeowner then faces a choice between liability insurance and viable protection against home invaders. All this because Senator Hatch and his [il]liberal associates would rather blame you than hold criminals accountable for their actions. Attack the American Gun Culture and Imprison Responsible Parents Aschcroft Amendment No. 342 (Vote No. 115, CR S5307) http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d106:SP00342: This amendment is perhaps the most insidious. It binds parents up in senseless paper work and regulations if they wish to train their children in the safe and responsible use of semiautomatic firearms and ammunition magazines greater than 10 rounds. For example, suppose you were to allow your 17 year old son to go shooting with a trusted brother or your father. If on this venture your son fired a Ruger P89 with a 15 round magazine without written permission slip from you, see you LATER. You have just committed a FEDERAL CRIME, created by Orrin Hatch. Obviously the Ashcroft Amendment will have no affect on real criminals, but it does make it more difficult for the law abiding to acquaint their children with the tools of liberty, like assault rifles, handguns, higher capacity magazines, etc. Which is exactly what Hatch and his fellow social engineers want. Knowing that they will NEVER extirpate the gun culture (i.e. self reliance and freedom) from this generation, they try to prohibit us from passing it along to the next. Register Gun Owners in FBI Database Hatch Amendment No. 344 (Vote No. 118, CR S5309) http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?r106:2:./temp/~r106IhzsJ0:: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?r106:2:./temp/~r106IhzsJ0:e42587: The Hatch Amendment, later superseded by the Lautenberg Amendment, required that all private party firearms transactions at gun shows be registered in the FBI database associated with the misnamed National Instant Check System (NICS). This is a classic example of the slippery slope in action. Initially, the instant registration system was required only for transactions conducted by firearms dealers. With the Hatch amendment, it is extended to private party transactions at gun shows. The final step is to mandate gun owner registration for all firearms transactions. Can this happen? Yes, it already has in the state of California. At the meeting on Wednesday, Hatch indicated that he did not believe that any gun owners were being registered in FBI's computers, but he would check with Louis Freeh to be sure. His diversionary tactic was surprisingly contradicted by Wayne LaPierre in the very same meeting, who indicated the NRA had filed a lawsuit to stop the FBI from their registration program. Conclusion The record demonstrates that Senator Hatch has sponsored or supported anti-gun-owner amendments to S. 254, and approved of other egregious amendments (such as the Lautenberg gun show ban) by voting for them once they were incorporated and the final vote on S. 254 was taken. True Second Amendment Senators, such as Bob Smith (N.H.) and Mike Enzi (WY), consistently voted against the adverse amendments and final passage of this subversive legislation. XXXX, I hope that you feel as though Senator Hatch has betrayed and exploited your confidence in him. I don't think you want to be defending a wayward politician that has contempt for our rights and opposes gun control by voting for it. Arnold XXXX wrote: <> I welcome the opportunity to clarify. I was expressing the opinion that I felt it was "dishonest" of a person or organization to infer that Senator Hatch supported the gun-control amendments to his Juvenile Justice Bill, when we have personally heard his disclaimers to the contrary. Perhaps I should have used the word "illogical". Let's leave it at that and move on. XXXX - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 17:59:25 -0700 From: Scott Bergeson Subject: FW: Defining Anti-Gun People - ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, February 21, 2000 1:28 AM Subject: Defining Anti-Gun People KEEP AND BEAR ARMS .ORG REPORT ====================================== Copyright © 2000 by KeepAndBearArms.org Republish anywhere with the following statement: "Reprinted from the KeepAndBearArms.org Report available at http://www.KeepAndBearArms.org" ====================================== Defining Anti-Gun People Identifying Their Outcomes in Plain English By Angel Shamaya Inspired by H.S. "Gunnie" Reagan - The Shooting Shaman http://www.keepandbeararms.org/defining_anti_gun_people.htm "The best defense is a good offense." The "pro-gun/anti-gun" verbiage is no longer effective. The time has come to draw new lines in the sand--to open new channels for accurate and results-oriented communication. The folks who wish to ban guns have begun to sway public opinion to formulate negative thoughts when they hear the word "gun." The word "gun" has now been linked to such words as killer, death, killing, murder, murdering, criminal, etc. When "pro" is added to the word "gun," freedom-lovers are now often associated as being "pro-killer", "pro-death", etc. With the media heartily biased against guns, the campaign against us through such programming has been effective. Let us work diligently and consistently to turn the tides by using the same simple tool-to our advantage. The time has come to utilize the amazing gift brought to us through the intelligent, accurate, and conscious use of Language. Jon Haupt blessed us with a fantastic expose on how languaging (metaphor) strategies are being used to defeat our gun rights. The ball he put in play is begging to be run for repeated touchdowns. (If you missed Jon's brilliant work, please go read it. It's called The Amazing Secret Weapon of the Gun Control Movement. http://www.keepandbeararms.org/amazing_secret_weapon.htm) In beginning to address the Reality of what being "pro" gun or "anti" gun really means, we must dig deep into the eventual results each position will produce if/when carried to its logical conclusion. We'll look at the results side-by-side from a few different vantage points. I'll be as brief as possible while making my points. I will continue to refer to the two sides of the gun issue as "pro" and "anti" to make this easy. When I'm done, we'll have new terms for each side of the gun issue for future communications in the field (and reminders of terms that have been batted around to now be effectively employed.) Let's start with the Good Guys first... The pro-gun position, carried forth into the repealing of illegal, unconstitutional gun laws and a return to a healthy societal balance, will conclude with a polite and civilized society. Amidst a national society of armed, law-abiding people who readily legally protect themselves, crime will plummet. The media will trickle and then pour out news of people stopping crime in its tracks. The more intelligent criminals will come to understand that "he who lives by the sword dies by the sword." The result will be freedom on many levels. Pro-gun people, therefore, can honestly be labeled as: Pro Freedom, Pro Liberty, Pro Self Defense, Pro Life, Pro People, Pro Active, Pro Peace, Anti Criminal, Anti Tyranny, Anti Rapist, Anti Murder, Anti Criminal, and a few other choice pro's and anti's you can dream up as you toy with this one and apply it in your letters and conversations. (Send me the good ones and we'll keep a running list on our site.) "Gun Informed" and "Gun Educated" are both quite accurate, as well. On to the anti-gun sheeple... The anti-gun position, carried to its final end, would leave the general population of law-abiding people without guns. Criminals will still get their guns. (When guns are outlawed, only the bad guys will have guns. Look at New York City and Washington, D.C. for good examples of poor legislation gone deeply awry.) Therefore, law-abiding people without guns means: more victims, easier prey, successful criminals, greater fear in the streets, more rapes, more murders, and on and on. In the anti-gun grand finale, which will NOT happen, the criminals would live by a creed much more like "he who lives by the sword gets rich, fat, and happy and has easy pickins on any street in America." Dissecting these facts and applying them to more descriptive and accurate labeling of our anti gun people led astray, let us now call an apple an apple. "Anti-gun" people work to develop easier prey and simpler, more effective victimization. They can therefore honestly be labeled: Victim Creators, Pro Victim, Pro Crime, Pro Rape, Pro Murder, Pro Fear, Anti Liberty, Anti Freedom, Anti Self Defense, Pro Chaos, Pro Violence, Violence Supporters, Criminal Enablers, and Supporters of Violent People (which of course translates to Anti Good Guys, and thus Anti People.) Take a minute and let your mind run wild with the endless ways to paint the truth about the folks we've been calling "anti-gun." They were getting off lightly with that label. See? Rosie O'Donnell surely won't like the press she gets when letters to editors start cropping up around the country explaining clearly how she's a "Criminal Enabler." Op-eds patiently identifying CitiBank, Levi's, and the mayors of quite a few American cities as being "Anti Liberty" will serve our purpose well. Diane Feinstein being associated quite easily as a "Nurturer of Criminals" will turn a few heads. And, more importantly, eventually people who've been swayed against guns will finally begin to Think for themselves. Some weeks back there was an online presentation of each of the Presidential candidates' views on the right to carry guns. This took place a day or two after one good woman in the Phoenix area was raped and shot. (For those of you who missed that story, she survived, and the assailant's second intended victim inflicted fatal lead poisoning upon his murderous brow.) My response was an article entitled "Al Gore Wants Women Raped." Some folks said that was going a bit too far, and I conceded. I cannot say he wants women raped with certainty. I can say with certainty Al Gore wants to make the work of rapists a hell of a lot easier. Angel Shamaya Criminal Stop Sign http://www.keepandbeararms.org webmaster@keepandbeararms.org What could happen if every American heard the truth about what gun control is doing to our society? If you could pitch in a few bucks to make sure many Americans would be presented the truth through the media, would you consider it? Please invest 5 minutes looking over the most intelligent pro-gun media campaign in America today by visiting http://www.citizensofamerica.org *=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*= Angel Shamaya Email Update Editor Webmaster, List Administrator webmaster@keepandbeararms.org H. S. "Gunnie" Reagan, Ph.D., D.D. Web Site Inspiration gunnie@keepandbeararms.org *=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*= Feedback and Support are welcome at our web site. See our revised concept for unifying the gun rights community at http://www.keepandbeararms.org/concept_for_unity.htm - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 11:47:13 -0700 From: Scott Bergeson Subject: FW: FYI. Terry Gump on Second Amendment. - ----- Subject: FYI. Terry Gump on Second Amendment. Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 11:27:40 -0700 From: "Mr. Black" dgb To All, Read Terry Gump's brilliant, inspiring example of parliamentary tact and constitutional understanding! And folks, next time please remember that the Second Amendment has nothing to do with guns -- or guns in schools and churches. You activist-types are so embarrassing! Mr. Black - ------BEGIN TRIBUNE SEGMENT------- http://www.sltrib.com/2000/feb/02192000/legislat/legislat.htm Hooper resident and gun activist Brent Odenwalder disagreed. He claimed the bills were an attempt to create a risk-free society and "the only Utopia was in Nazi Germany." Odenwalder was repeatedly gaveled out of order by Judiciary Chairman Terry Spencer for bringing up constitutional arguments. "DO NOT GET OFF INTO TANGENTIAL SUBJECTS LIKE THE SECOND AMENDMENT," Spencer warned. He backed down only when Sen. Parley Hellewell complained that witnesses should be free to say what they please in their allotted three minutes. - ------END TRIBUNE SEGMENT------- [Interpretation: "C'mon you guys! This is about disarming the citizenry and exercising absolute and tyrannical control over them, not about the Second Amendment! Stop trying to derail our progress!] - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 20:52:13 -0700 From: Scott Bergeson Subject: FW: LEG-ALERTS 2-22: MAJOR NEW THREAT!, A BIG VICTORY!! Major NEW threat! VICTORY!! Beattie's schools, churches bills DEAD! Committee hearings Wed. Today's actions (partial) Volunteers needed! MAJOR NEW THREAT! HB 363 - Gun Restrictions Amendments (G. Cox) Anti-gun fanatic Gary Cox has taken the WORST of this year's crop of gun control bills and combined it all into the Mother of Rights Revocations bills. HB 363 includes: LIFETIME REVOCATION OF RIGHTS for MISDEMEANORS! Unconstitutional "ex post facto" revocation of rights for juveniles - - NO jury trial, and some MISDEMEANORS are included LIFETIME REVOCATION OF RIGHTS for anyone who has EVER been committed to a mental institution - even wrongful commitments! LIFETIME REVOCATION OF RIGHTS for possession of a marijuana seed or a single "illegal" pain pill. LIFETIME REVOCATION OF RIGHTS for those (like Michael New) dishonorably discharged for political reasons. HB 363 will be heard WEDNESDAY FEB. 23, 4 PM, Rm. 223, House Judiciary Committee Please plan to attend! Please contact members of the committee and insist that they OPPOSE HB 363! A. Lamont Tyler, Chair 801-272-1218 Glenn L. Way, Vice Chair 801-798-2295 John Swallow 801-572-8201 Katherine Bryson 801-226-2061 Martin Stephens 801-731-5346 Bill Hickman 435-673-2671 Chad Bennion 801-281-1607 Greg Curtis 801-943-3091 Patrice Arent 801-272-1956 Neal Hendrickson 801-969-8920 Gary Cox 801-967-6790 BEATTIE'S BILLS KILLED! Thanks to YOUR EFFORTS, Senate President Lane Beattie called a press conference today to announce that he would kill SB 161S1 (Hall passes for gun owners) and SB 162S2 (Government-mandated persecution of gun owners by churches). According to Sen. Valentine, he and Sen. Hellewell (both of whom voted FOR these bad bills in committee!) got so much negative feedback from YOU that they met with Sen. Beattie and asked him to kill the bills. What we're doing WORKS! Today's press conference was eerily reminiscent of Beattie's similar press conference two years ago when he killed a similar bill banning guns in schools and churches. All of you deserve credit for this victory! THANK YOU!! UTGuns hopes that this time, Sen. Beattie will learn from experience. MORE COMMITTEE HEARING WEDNESDAY! Senate Judiciary, 8 AM, Rm. 416 HB 161 - Background Checks for Weapons Purchase (Tyler) This is JUVENILE BRADY, and open juvenile records to BCI for background checks. It is an unconstitutional ex post facto law, and violates the principle that rights may not be revoked except by a jury trial. Senate Transportation and Public Safety, 8 AM, Rm 403 HB 245 - Hysteria in Public Schools (Wright) This bill would require the parents of students who bring a toy or pretend gun to school to meet with school administrators to discuss possible expulsion. It would NOT apply to students who commit actual violent crimes such as rape or assault, so long as no firearm is involved. Do we really want to teach our kids that violent crime is less serious than possession of a water pistol?! The real purpose of the bill, according to sponsor Rep. Bill Wright, is getting federal funds. SB 32 - Marksmanship Tests for Concealed Carry (R. Allen) This bill would require an annual marksmanship test to get or keep a concealed carry permit. It would also require registration of each gun that you carry or might carry. Estimated costs are $50-$100 per year, per gun, for a concealed carry permit! And how many innocent people have been killed or injured by concealed carry permittees who didn't pass a marksmanship test? ZERO!! The real point is to return to the days where only the wealthy elite were "permitted" to carry a gun, NOT to "increase public safety". House Judiciary Committee, 4 PM, Rm. 223 HB 363 - Revocation of Rights (G. Cox) See above! TODAY'S ACTIONS SB 200 - Mental Health Commitments (Montgomery) passed the Senate and has been introduced in the House. HB 296 - Prevention of Retaliatory Lawsuits (Lockhart) passed the House with a unanimous vote (71-0-4) and is now in the Senate. HB 173 - Computer forfeiture (Buckner) passed the Senate Human Services committee today (3-0-2) and will now go to the Senate floor for its final votes. HB 124 - Asset forfeiture revisions (Wright) Still in committee, so no word yet! VOLUNTEERS NEEDED! As you can tell from the above, there are THREE gun bills being heard at 8 AM tomorrow. If you can attend one of these hearings, (or the 4 PM hearing on HB 363), please let me know. We need pro-gun people at EACH of these hearings! You can reach me by email (righter@therighter.com) or at 801-566-1067. NOTE: Thursday is the LAST day for committee hearings. After that, bills are voted on WITHOUT public comment. We expect major attacks on our rights during the final days of the session, so please keep YOUR legislators' contact information handy. Also, make sure House and Senate leadership know that you expect them to protect our rights! Contact information is available at http://www.utguns.freeservers.com/contact.html. DELEGATES NEEDED!! We need to organize to elect pro-gun, pro-Constitution people to serve as our elected officials! Many of you have written to ask what YOU can do to help! The UTGuns delegate information and recruitment pages are now up and working! Please go to http://www.utguns.freeservers.com/volunteer.html and sign up to volunteer! Please forward this information to your pro-rights friends, neighbors and relatives. We need as many people as possible working to elect good people! With YOUR help, the next legislative session will see far fewer attacks on our rights! With YOUR help, we can have a Governor who will VETO unconstitutional, anti-gun bills! With YOUR help, we can have pro-gun Congressmen and Senators in Washington. With YOUR help, we can have an attorney general who supports the Constitutions of Utah and the US as written! Without YOUR help, next year will be worse. PLEASE VOLUNTEER! - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2000 08:23:05 -0700 From: Scott Bergeson Subject: FW: Dave Jones on Guns I don't see "also" before "including". This seems to indicate the quoted "law" addresses *only* those "violations" listed. Scott - ----- Subject: Re: Guns Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2000 06:42:34 -0800 (PST) From: "David A. Hansen" David Jones sent me this reply: David, The current law under the section that the bill dealt with reads 31 any serious violation affecting another student or a staff member, or any serious 32 violation occurring in a school building, in or on school property, or in conjunction with any 33 school activity, including the possession, control, or actual or threatened use of a real, look alike, 34 or pretend weapon, explosive, or noxious or flammable material under Section 53A-3-502 , or the 35 sale, control, or distribution of a drug or controlled substance as defined in Section 58-37-2, an 36 imitation controlled substance defined in Section 58-37b-2 , or drug paraphernalia as defined in 37 Section 58-37a-3 ; or" The law with the strong punishment of toy guns is already in Utah code. The bill with ammendments served to establish a policy that would allow a violating student to return to school contingent on the local school board. It also required an annual report of such proceeding be produced. The ammendments I felt were less stringent than current law. I agree with your strong desire to address actual violence in the school. I also think that students should follow positive examples, and hence I ran a bill this legislative session that would ban concealed weapons permit carriers, excluding peace officers and other exceptions, into schools. While not addressing the causes of violence I feel that these bills address safety issues. I respect your opinion and thank you for taking the time to share it with me. Thank you for taking the time to involve yourself in the political process. Sincerely Rep. Dave Jones Democrat Minority Leader - House of Representatives So there you have it: it is a negative example to our school children to exercise God-given rights. Shame on us! Dave Hansen - - ------------------------------ End of utah-firearms-digest V2 #181 ***********************************