HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jdt@voodoo.boeing.com (Jim Tomlinson)
Newsgroups: seattle.general
Subject: Re: DWI
Date: 24 Jul 92 23:59:37 GMT
Reply-To: jdt@voodoo.boeing.com
Distribution: seattle
Organization: BoGART To You, Buddy

In article <2861@voodoo.UUCP>, mnb@voodoo.boeing.com (Mike Burr) writes:
|> In article <1992Jul23.164228.24188@beaver.cs.washington.edu> torerik@cs.washington.edu (Tor Erik Jeremiassen) writes:
|> >
|> >Ah, but Texas is one of the few states that does not have an open container
|> >law. It is illegal for the driver to drink, but the passengers can drink
|> >all they want. 
|> >
|> Not in Cherokee County.  While Texas may be more liberal in some ways, they
|> still have some "dry" counties where you can't purchase liquor.  In Cherokee
|> county, the only way you can legally drink is to go to a restuarant and 
|> show your "drinking club" card - a privilage you pay for...

    Ah, yes, the membership clubs.  I finally threw my collection of
membership cards away a couple of years ago; such a pleasure to spend
$1.50-$2 for the privilege to then buy a glass of wine in a restaurant
that you might never visit again.  If you eat out much in Texas, you
get quite an assortment of cards.
    The liquor laws (at least around Dallas) were actually different by
justice-of-the-peace parish or some such whacko governmental division
(much smaller than counties).  There were 'wet', 'dry', and 'damp'
(beer and wine only) areas.  The first time I went grocery shopping I
covered the store 5 times before asking, in frustration, "where's the
beer?", only to be amazed by the answer: "5 miles down the road."
-- 
Jim Tomlinson    BoGART Project    Boeing Computer Services    Bellevue, WA
jdt@voodoo.boeing.com       ...uunet!bcstec!voodoo!jdt        (206)865-6578 
         "Airplanes are cool." - the man on the street in Seattle
Newsgroups: seattle.general
From: strong@tc.fluke.COM (Norm Strong)
Subject: Re: Militia (was: Results of I 590)
Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc., Everett, WA
Distribution: seattle
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 15:08:26 GMT

In article <2212@shuksan.boeing.com> major@shuksan.boeing.com (Mike Schmitt) writes:
}
}>> (description of the State Militia.......)
}
}  Lindberg: 
}> Are you trying to say that the meaning of the Constitution should change
}> if we start using a term differently?
}
}  Not!
}
}  Swoosh!  Went right over your head, didn't it?
} 
}  The difference between titular terminology as applied by various states
}  to describe their internal organization is to subscribe the generic term
}  'militia' in whatever the accepted usage and use the term to describe 
}  their "Militia".   Let's not be strict constructionists when it comes to
}  the use of titles and whatever their origin.  

The 2nd Amendment says, "A well regulated militia being necessary for
the security of a free state,  (which is interesting and historically
informative) The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be
infringed."  

you will notice that it did not say, "the right of people who are
members of said militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." 

In fact, the part of the amendment in front of the comma is strictly
parenthetical, and has no effect on the force of the predicate of the
amendment, which is that, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms
shall not be infringed."  

In other words, it isn't necessary to define 'militia' in order to
understand the 2nd amendment.  
-- 

Norm Strong  (strong@tc.fluke.com)
2528 31st S.   Seattle WA 98144   USA
From: kimbo@tc.fluke.COM (Kim R. Boyer)
Subject: WANTED: Apple //e Disk ][ info or replacement
Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc., Everett, WA
Distribution: seattle
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 15:28:56 GMT


This past weekend I tried hooking up an old Apple IIe I received from my
sister.  For some reason (maybe because I had the monitor temporarily
sitting on top of it!) the Disk II floppy drive started smoking and then
let out a pop before I could power down.  Turned out the pop was a 470
mf capacitor blowing apart.  Replaced the cap, but the drive still
doesn't want to work (motors whir, LEDs come on, but nothing else
happens- won't read a startup disk).  The IIe passes the kernal test OK.

If anyone has a schematic for this drive, I certainly wourld appreciate
a copy of it and any other technical information.  There doesn't appear
to be much to either the drive or the controller.  Alternatively, does
anyone have for sale an old, but working Disk II drive they would like
to part with or know somebody who might?

Thanks for the help!


      ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
      +  Kim Boyer    Sr. Product Planner                          +
      +  Domain:      kimbo@tc.fluke.COM    Compuserve:  76637,162 +
      +  UUCP:        {uw-beaver,microsof,sun}!fluke!kimbo	   +
      +  Voice:       (206) 356-5873    FAX:  (206) 356-5108	   +
      +  US Mail:      John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc.,  M/S 266D        +
      +   	       P.O. Box 9090,  Everett, WA 98206           + 
      ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 

Newsgroups: seattle.general
From: mckenzie@cs.washington.edu (Neil McKenzie)
Subject: The great prince (was Re: DWI)
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle
Distribution: seattle
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 02:43:14 GMT

In article <1992Jul21.162938.4145@eskimo.celestial.com> kurt@eskimo.celestial.com (Kurt Cockrum) writes:
>>The army: the great prince issues commands, founds states, vests families
>>with fiefs.  Inferior people should not be employed.  (The I-Ching)
>
>We could do with a whole lot less "great princes", IMO.  They are part of
>the problem; the people who slavishly follow them, and believe in systems
>that require "great princes", are the remainder of the problem.
>Prince-employees *are* inferior people (ka-ching nextpleez!).
>-- 
>kurt@grogatch.celestial.com (Kurt Cockrum)

Very creative, Kurt.  You get an A.

BTW the sig comes from the Firesign Theater's Further Adventures of
Nick Danger; they stole it from the I-Ching.
-- 
--Neil McKenzie 
mckenzie@cs.washington.edu	UUCP: ..!uw-beaver!uw-june!mckenzie
The army: the great prince issues commands, founds states, vests families
with fiefs.  Inferior people should not be employed.  (The I-Ching)
From: kevin@milton.u.washington.edu (Kevin Caskey)
Subject: Re: Travelling armed 
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Distribution: seattle
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 17:32:19 GMT

In article <1992Jul22.042823.18452@seanews.akita.com> billmcc@seanews.akita.com (Bill McCormick) writes:
>In article <1992Jul21.220714.5347@u.washington.edu> fetrow@biostat.washington.edu (David Fetrow) writes:
>>>> In article <1992Jul20.060118.234@u.washington.edu> davidb@zeus.ce.washington.edu (David W. Barts) writes:
>>>> >In article <1733@rwing.UUCP>, pat@rwing.UUCP (Pat Myrto) writes:
>
<<<<< lots of stuff deleted>>>>>


>I see a typical gun-control fallacy here.  Taking guns away from the good
>guys won't stop the bad guys from getting guns.  England has one of the
>toughest gun-control laws in the world, but the bad guys still shoot.
>
>Bill

Dear Bill,
The answer isn't that English bad guys don't shoot it's that they shoot
far less often. In all of Europe, with a population exceeding ours, the
death rate by firearms is way below ours (not sure of number but I seem
to recall its less than 10% of ours).

There may be other factors but fewer guns in houses, glove compartments,
jacket pockets AND on the television can't hurt.

Mutually Assured Destruction just doesn't seem to be the way to go

Kevin

Newsgroups: seattle.general
From: dcb@kopachuk.uucp (David Breneman)
Subject: Re: Militia (was: Results of I 590)
Organization: Tacoma Screw Products, Inc.
Distribution: seattle
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 19:07:34 GMT

In article <2209@shuksan.boeing.com> major@shuksan.boeing.com (Mike Schmitt) writes:
>
>  Whatever was the intended definition of "militia" was when the framers
>  of the Constitution used the term - today it can have a different meaning.
>
>  Washington State has a Militia.  It is a uniformed armed military 
>  organization which belongs to the Military Department of the State.  It is

Details of agency deleted...

This situation does not change the purpose of the 2nd amendment, and if
you believe it does then no contract or law is worth a damn if all you
have to do to subvert it is to change the colloquial meaning of a word
or phrase in it after the fact.  (If you hold to this position, next
time somebody breaks into your house, why don't you call the rock band
The Police to come and help you. :-)

This is newspeak at its freightening worst. 

-- 
David Breneman     Sys Admin, Tacoma Screw Products, Inc. |  ____  ____  ____
dcb@tacoma.uucp           |   SCREWIE the TSP CLOWN sez-  |   /   /___  /___/ 
 ..!uunet!tacoma!dcb      |  "Nylok lock nuts lose their  |  /   ____/ / 
CompuServe: 75760,1232    | binding strength after 1 use!"|
From: alpinist@eskimo.celestial.com (David Butler)
Newsgroups: seattle.general
Subject: Re: Travelling armed
Date: 22 Jul 92 19:03:22 GMT
Distribution: seattle
Organization: =>ESKIMO NORTH (206) 367-3837 SEATTLE, WA.<=

In article <1992Jul22.042823.18452@seanews.akita.com> billmcc@seanews.akita.com (Bill McCormick) writes:
>In article <1992Jul21.220714.5347@u.washington.edu> fetrow@biostat.washington.edu (David Fetrow) writes:

>> ..and yes, I once had the happy task of cooling down a situation where an
>>armed drunk guy was trying to break into his ex-wife's room. No fun but at
>>least there was only one gun instead of two (didn't know about the gun when
>>I got involved).

>Quick question.  Who was the guest?  The ex-husband or the wife?  Was the
>problem that the guest was armed or that some random drunk thug ex-husband
>was armed?

>I see a typical gun-control fallacy here.  Taking guns away from the good
>guys won't stop the bad guys from getting guns.  England has one of the
>toughest gun-control laws in the world, but the bad guys still shoot.

     This argument doesn't work.  The MAJORITY of murders in this country
are commited by people known to the victim in a fit of rage.  Not by "Bad
Guys" who would have owned guns illegally.  If guns were taken away from
the "Good Guys" (ie Normal Population) then the guy in the above example
wouldn't have had one in a dangerous drunken rage.

     I do happen to support individual rights to own a gun.  But I also
realize that the Murder rate (gun violence rate) would go down if guns
were illegal.  If only "Bad Guys" had guns that would be a heck of a lot
less people being shot on a daily basis.

-- 
****************************************************************************
* Dave                          *               The Alpinist               *
* alpinist@eskimo.celestial.com *            DARE to be stoopid!           *
****************************************************************************
Xref: sparky seattle.general:2359 pnw.personals:419
From: games@max.u.washington.edu
Newsgroups: seattle.general,pnw.personals
Subject: House for rent.  Vashon Island
Date: 27 Jul 92 21:34:01 GMT
Article-I.D.: max.1992Jul27.143401.1
Distribution: seattle,pnw

House for rent.

Scenic Vashon Island location (Stunning Mt. Raineer View)
1.5 acre lot
2 bedroom 1 bath
fireplace, hardwood floor
Full basement (including second fireplace)
Lots of trees, several fruit trees
Dishwasher
Washer/Dryer
1/2 garage (not big enough for a car, but good storage), lots of
	uncovered parking

$725/Month
1st, Last. Deposit

If you are looking for a nice place to live in the near country
(short ferry ride to West Seattle, or downtown Seattle), this is the house for
you.

	John or Cheryl Stevens-Schlick
	(206) 935-4384

	5222 44th Ave SW
	Seattle, WA 98136
Newsgroups: seattle.general
From: fetrow@biostat.washington.edu (David Fetrow)
Subject: Re: Travelling armed 
Organization: Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle
Distribution: seattle
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 08:41:45 GMT

In article <1992Jul22.042823.18452@seanews.akita.com> billmcc@seanews.akita.com (Bill McCormick) writes:
>In article <1992Jul21.220714.5347@u.washington.edu> fetrow@biostat.washington.edu (David Fetrow) writes:

>>
>> ..and yes, I once had the happy task of cooling down a situation where an
>>armed drunk guy was trying to break into his ex-wife's room. No fun but at
>>least there was only one gun instead of two......
>
>Quick question.  Who was the guest?  The ex-husband or the wife?  Was the
>problem that the guest was armed or that some random drunk thug ex-husband
>was armed?
>
>I see a typical gun-control fallacy here.  Taking guns away from the good
>guys won't stop the bad guys from getting guns.....

 This is the last I will say about this publically. I doubt anyones mind
will be changed but I just could let one line of this pass. For the reading
impaired: my thesis following is that "'good guys' are hard to find"



	The drunken thug was indeed the ex-husband (that wasn't clear?).

	Most of time I understand he acted like a...dare I say it....
	"good guy". I've known a guy who went spla exactly ONCE in his
	life. Wife left him and he drank until he was stupid. Too bad he
	didn't have a gun to protect himself handy.

	If we aren't a Mother Teresa we probably have been in a blind
	stupid rage several times in life. At that point we are not 
	"good guys", we are a menace i.e. "Bad Guys". There are lots and lots of
	"good guys" and when you total them up ("lots of good guys who are
	rarely menaces") you get a nasty threat, apparently greater than
	the "bad guys" who, fortuneatly, are rare and only do their thing
	a few minutes or hours at a time.

	I was very very happy that there was only the one gun (the ex-wife
	and boyfriend were unarmed). I will continue to be happy about that.
	If you find that illogical: tough.

	For anyone who does own a gun: by all means, lots of safety classes!


 Hoping nobody gets shot, by friend OR enemy,
 XXOO

	-dave-
From: hochberg@misty.boeing.com (michael hochberg)
Newsgroups: seattle.general
Subject: Re: DWI
Date: 23 Jul 92 19:03:47 GMT
Organization: Boeing Commercial Airplane BCS Support

Driving is a priveledge we earn by taking a test and drivers education
classes.  It is not a right.      

The government can restrict priveledges it gives, such as imposing the DWI
laws on drivers.

And if you don't buy that argument, I agree with Bill. Why does the guy 
shooting a shotgun in the park get arrested even though he may never
have hit anyone?  A person recklessly endangering other people must be stopped.
If you think that violates you rights, tough.  What about my rights?  I 
have a right to drive without a bunch of drunks on the road.

Personally, I think we need much stricter DWI laws.  I think losing your license
for 6 months on a first offense, and losing it forever on a repeat offense
is appropriate.  And if the person is caught driving without a license,
a minimum of 1 year in solitary confinement.

Drinking is great, but have a brain.  Use a taxi.

Mike
From: hochberg@misty.boeing.com (michael hochberg)
Newsgroups: seattle.general
Subject: Re: Information about buying a house
Date: 27 Jul 92 18:13:39 GMT
Organization: Boeing Commercial Airplane BCS Support

I have never had a real estate agent worth a damn anywhere.  In my
opinion, they are all turds.

Mike
Newsgroups: seattle.general
From: srg@quick.com (Spencer Garrett)
Subject: Re: Travelling armed
Keywords: Guns laws crime murder waiting periods
Organization: Quicksilver Engineering, Seattle USA
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 21:42:07 GMT

>  So, where/how does one get a carry permit?

From RCW 9.41.070:
"The judge of a court of record, the chief of police of a municipality,
or the sheriff of a county, shall within thirty days after the filing
of an application of any person issue a license to such person to carry
a pistol concealed on his person within this state for four years from
the date of issue, for the purposes of protection or while engaged
in business, sport or while travelling."

In theory, you can go to any sheriff's office, police station, or court,
but in practice they seem to make you get at least your first permit
from whoever patrols your neighborhood.  That means Seattle PD if you
live in Seattle, for instance.  Seattle treats the 30 day limit as a
minimum instead of a maximum, and I hear that Bellevue now requires
a six-week wait to file the application.  Both practices are illegal,
and the law explicitly give you the right to sue the people involved,
but political realities are such that it's not likely worth your time.
You *must* be issued a permit unless you have a felony record, history
of mental problems, etc. (there's a complete list in the statute).  Oh,
and you must be 21 years old.  The fee is $23.

>  Where do you go to get instruction and practice?

There are 2 full-time firearms academies in the area (that I know of)
plus many informal sources of instruction.  There are a bunch of gun
clubs in the area, plus a fair number of public ranges.  Which one(s)
you might prefer depend a lot on where you live and what kind of shooting
you want to do.  Write me if you want help choosing.

>  I suppose that it is possible to buy a pistol
>  at any of the gun shops in the area.  Does
>  Washington state, King Co. or Seattle have
>  a waiting period?

State law preempts local law in nearly all cases here, so it doesn't much
matter where in the state you go.  If you have a concealed weapons permit,
you can buy any gun that's legal for you to own and take it with you.  If
not, then there's a 5-day waiting period for handguns.  Handgun sales
by dealers are registered in this state.  Private party sales are legal
and unregulated.  Federal law covers it all, of course.
From: mnb@voodoo.boeing.com (Mike Burr)
Newsgroups: seattle.general
Subject: Re: Travelling armed
Keywords: Guns laws crime murder waiting periods
Date: 30 Jul 92 23:11:43 GMT
Distribution: pnw
Organization: Boeing Graphics project, Bellevue WA

In article <1992Jul28.141840.2449@Happy-Man.com> Irving_Wolfe@Happy-Man.com writes:
>
>Not so!  Without drug laws, a days worth of cocaine or heroin might
>cost a dollar.  There would be no need to steal, since a few
>minutes' begging would yield enough for the day's food and drugs.
>

A dollar?  Come on Irving, perhaps the base cost would be a dollar, but
if you are going to legalize drugs you are going to have to make them
pay their own way.... so 
you would have to add enough taxes to pay for all the problems
drug abuse causes in society. Contrary to your rosy scenerio not 
all the problems would magically go away if
drugs were legal.  You would still have rehab costs for people who want to
get off of them, medical costs associated with heavy usage, cost of accidents
by people who are mentally impaired, costs of pre-mature and drug addicted
babies, costs of lost worker productivity and absenteeism, cost of broken
homes, disfunctional families, child neglect in cases where both parents
are addicts, costs of poorly educated school age abusers...... 
how much does that add up too?   Oh, and then of 
course you have to add even some more taxes for revenue generation, don't
want to just break even on the deal.  So now what's that daily dose cost?


-- 
Michael Burr   mnb@voodoo.boeing.com  | Boeing Computer Services, Bellevue WA
From: bright@nazgul.UUCP (Walter Bright)
Newsgroups: seattle.general
Subject: Re: Late Night Coffee in Seattle?
Date: 28 Jul 92 03:58:30 GMT
Reply-To: bright@nazgul.UUCP (Walter Bright)
Distribution: seattle
Organization: Zortech, Seattle

In article <1992Jul26.055654.5311@u.washington.edu> hochman@u.washington.edu writes:
/Does anybody know of any places that stay open late serving coffee
/(later than midnight)?

Try the Denny's on Mercer. The coffee ain't great, but the entertainment is.
Me and a friend used to love going down in the wee hours, drink coffee, and
just watch the bizarre night people wandering in and out.
Newsgroups: seattle.general
From: davidb@zeus.ce.washington.edu (David W. Barts)
Subject: Re: Travelling armed
Keywords: Guns laws crime murder waiting periods
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 22:24:01 GMT

In article <1992Jul27.160346.29763@apex.com>, chuckh@apex.com (Chuck Huffington) writes:
> In article <1992Jul27.043429.15821@eskimo.celestial.com> kurt@eskimo.celestial.com (Kurt Cockrum) writes:
> >OK, WODDers, what's wrong with these arguments?  Why must our freedoms,
> >lives and livelihoods continue to be sacrificed for your insane desire
> >to keep people from being high or from partaking of pleasure in other ways?
> >
> >You get rid of the elements of crime and high-stakes risk associated with
> >drugs and a *lot* of problems go away. [ edited ]
>
> Do you really believe that the people making the huge profits selling illegal
> drugs will just go away?  If the government is selling legal drugs
> I would expect the gangs to sell something "better".  You don't want that
> govt shit, this stuffs a lot better.

Well it certainly seems to work for alcohol and tobacco.  I don't see a
huge wave of crime & violence associated with gangs selling something
"better" than what can legally be purchased.

Given the choice between buying something of known purity and quality
from the local liquor store and buying something of dubious quality and
purity from a known CROOK (who probably has no misgivings about selling
a contaminated or adulterated product), in a seedy part of town, at an
inconvenient time of day, in a transaction that may very well be a
"sting" operation -- there's no contest.  The liquor store wins hands
down.

--
David Barts  N5JRN                      UW Civil Engineering, FX-10
davidb@ce.washington.edu                Seattle, WA  98195