HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: m0102@tnc.UUCP (FRANK NEY)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: interesting [and scary] blurb...
Summary: A suggestion for your reading list
Keywords: organs SF Niven
Date: 29 Dec 92 14:52:22 GMT
Reply-To: m0102@tnc.UUCP (FRANK NEY)
Organization: The Next Challenge, Fairfax, Va.


Anyone who wishes to see what a world with such policies on organ
donations looks like should read just about anything by Larry Niven,
but especially his 'Gil the ARM' books.

Sorry,  societies where jaywalking is a captial crime (so that
others may use your organs) are fun to read about but not nice to live
in.

But then maybe it's just me.

Frank Ney N4ZHG EMT-A  LPVa NRA ILA GOA CCRTKBA "M-O-U-S-E"
Commandant and Acting President, Northern Virginia Free Militia
Send e-mail for an application and more information
----------------------------------------------------------------
"...I am opposed to all attempts to license or restrict the arming of
individuals...I consider such laws a violation of civil liberty, 
subversive of democratic political institutions, and self-defeating
in their purpose."
        - Robert Heinlein, in a 1949 letter concerning "Red Planet"
-- 
The Next Challenge - Public Access Unix in Northern Va. - Washington D.C.
703-803-0391 To log in for trial and account info.
From: joan@koala.berkeley.edu ()
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: "Ethics" Courses, etc. & the R.T.K.B.A
Date: 2 Jan 1993 21:08:16 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: koala.berkeley.edu


In article <92366.170343GUNDEVIL@ASUACAD.BITNET> Shooting Club at ASU <GUNDEVIL@ASUACAD.BITNET> writes:
]>
]>We asked all our E-Mail I.D'd Philosophy Dept. faculty what they thought
]>about orienting a discussion in their Ethics class to the Right to Keep
]>and Bear Arms, as guaranteed by the Second Amendment.
]>
]>We received a single response:
]>
]> "There are two sets of issues surrounding the r.t.k.b.a.  

	[Philosophy of Law issues cut.]

]> The second set of issues surrounding the r.t.k.b.a. is more directly
]> ethical or political in nature.  One might ask whether people should
]> keep arms or should be permitted to keep arms or should have the right
]> to keep and bear arms.  Here, we ignore questions steming from the fact
]> that there is a second amendment; we ignore questions about what the
]> second amendment means and about the status of the constitution, etc.
]> This second set of questions might be appropriate for a political
]> philosophy class or an applied ethics class.  I (and others) do teach
]> these classes.  And it might be possible to talk me into taking up
]> this topic.  We would have to talk about it and I would have to give
]> it some thought.

	[rest of post deleted]

	It's nice that this professor has responded and is willing to
consider the issue.  His questions appear one-sided, though.  One might
also ask whether people should be encouraged to keep arms, or whether
the government "should be permitted" to disarm the masses.  Other questions
might be... Should knowledge of basic firearms safety be discouraged?
or -- Should an ethics class know correct details about firearms before
considering these issues?

	Joan V
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: PA142548@utkvm1.utk.edu (T. Archer)
Subject: Re: Bad cops - a perfect example
Organization: University of Tennessee 
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 18:58:30 GMT

In article <1992Dec20.210743.26613@ms.uky.edu> miles@ms.uky.edu (Stephen D. Grant) writes:
>Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
>Path: utkux1.utk.edu!cs.utk.edu!darwin.sura.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!ukma!miles
>From: miles@ms.uky.edu (Stephen D. Grant)
>Subject: Re: Bad cops - a perfect example
>References: <l_arcyf@dixie.com> <75745@apple.apple.COM> 
>    <1gt8oaINN53r@transfer.stratus.com> <75818@apple.apple.COM>
>Message-ID: <1992Dec20.210743.26613@ms.uky.edu>
>Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 02:07:43 GMT
>Organization: University of Kentucky, USA. -5 GMT
>Lines: 16
>earlw@Apple.COM (Earl Wallace) writes:
>
>>Could this happen?
>>  A rash of cop-killing is occuring when the cop stops a car for speeding.
>>  The driver rolls down the window and starts firing at the officer as he
>>  approaches. The officer dies.  There was no reason for the officer to think
>>  the speeder would be a threat, so his gun wasn't drawn.  This event happens
>>  a lot, over 10 cops a day are killed in the US every day this way. So the
>>  Weclome to the police state.
>
>     Lets see, that would be over 3,560 police killed each year in this way  
>     alone. Do you have a source for this claim?
>     We all are aware of the dangers of the police business. This thread was
>     discussing the abuse of power in law-enforcement though, different topic.
>
>
Nono!  He was proposing a hypothetical example.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Vote Dempublican, it's easier than thinking.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Xref: sparky talk.politics.guns:25794 news.admin:8778 comp.org.eff.talk:8190 comp.society.privacy:877
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 92 09:43:29 GMT
From: John De Armond <jgd@dixie.com>
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,news.admin,comp.org.eff.talk,comp.society.privacy
Subject: Posting Email (was Re: Final Answer to Tavares) 
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 120, Message 5 of 8

ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy) writes:

>[Email posted without my permission is deleted, as such an act is
> totally unacceptable to me. I have stated before that I consider
> such an act a gross breach of net.ethics.]

>{Since Tavares is willing to stoop to the posting of email without
> permission or even notification, the followup is set to a group
> where he will feel much more at home}

This thread originated in talk.politics.guns but it has wider implications
so this is cross-posted appropriately.

I received this month's "Folio" magazine, a trade publication of the 
publishing industry.  In the "Briefings" column (current events) is
a note that is relevant to people posting private email.

"Harpers" magazine has just been ordered to pay "controversal writing
professor" (Folio's words) Gordon Lish $2000 in a violation of the fair use 
provision of the Copyright act.  A federal judge found that Harpers violated 
fair use by publishing about half of a letter Lish sends to prospective
students.  Harpers published the letter to "illustrate Lish's writing
style."  While the judge threw out Lish's claims of libel, intentional
infliction of emotional distress and false representation, he did order
"Harpers" to pay at the rate of $1.67 per word (!)  Gee, wish I could 
get that word rate for articles I write!

Assuming this case withstands Harpers stated intent to appeal, it sets
the groundwork for a similar suit against those who publish Email
wtihout permission.  I suspect that a suit against some Usenetter
who publishes email with the intent to embarrass or cause intentional
harm is only matter of time.

(Before anyone asks, No I have no further details.  If you're interested
in details, look it up on Westlaw or something.)

John

-- 
John De Armond, WD4OQC               |Interested in high performance mobility?  
Performance Engineering Magazine(TM) | Interested in high tech and computers? 
Marietta, Ga                         | Send ur snail-mail address to 
jgd@dixie.com                        | perform@dixie.com for a free sample mag
Need Usenet public Access in Atlanta?  Write Me for info on Dixie.com.


Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,talk.politics.drugs,sci.psychology
From: smpod@ariel.lerc.nasa.gov (Stefan)
Subject: Re: The basic problem with anti-gun nuts.
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: who knows
Date: 22 Dec 1992 12:37 EST  

bz269@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (James D. Del Vecchio) writes...
>   What studies have been done on the correlation between racial/ethnic 
>integration and crime?   It might seem that people would be more willing
>to perpetrate crimes on "outsiders" to their ethnic group than on people
>they identify with more.   Given this, a region or area with more of a mix
>might have more crime than otherwise.
> 
>   Any ideas?

The most frequent victims of black criminals are black.  I think that much
crime is motivated by opportunism and low probability of recrimination.
From: csjohn@watson.mtsu.edu (J Wallace)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Busted: Harry Connick Jr. in Illinois
Date: 28 Dec 1992 18:29:28 -0600
Organization: Dept of Comp Science, Middle Tenn State Univ, Murfreesboro, TN
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: watson.mtsu.edu
Summary: Harry gets arrested by the airport dicks.

Did you hear about Harry Connick Jr. getting arrested in an
Illinois airport for trying to bring an unloaded 9mm pistol that
he had received as a Christmas present home with him in his overnight
bag?  This is no joke, and they are after him big time.  He didn't even
try to sneak it onto the plane!  He went up to an airport security dick
and asked him if he could bring it home with him on the plane.  What
a mistake.  He was arrested, spent the night in jail, and is facing
a $1000 fine and potentially a year in jail!  Granted, what he did was
incredibly naive, considering today's politically correct anti-gun
environment that we have found ourselves in.  He was undoubtably
under the assumption that he really lived in a free country.
What a police state we have become.  There is no justice being 
carried out here.  All I see is a government which has become
out of control.
-- 
John Wallace   ||   INTERNET: csjohn@knuth.mtsu.edu
> > We have just the government that we deserve < <
From: csjohn@knuth.mtsu.edu (J Wallace)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Traveling with a gun
Date: 30 Dec 1992 09:40:17 -0600
Organization: Dept of Comp Science, Middle Tenn State Univ, Murfreesboro, TN
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: knuth.mtsu.edu

In <1992Dec29.183250.25517@samba.oit.unc.edu> rdrob@med.unc.edu (Ricky Roberson) writes:

>Hi folks!  Just ran across this group, and hope I can find some help here.
>Can anyone tell me the *current* laws concerning carrying a weapon in a
>vehicle.  Does it vary from state to state?  I know it can't be concealed,
>but does it have to be registered?  Could you borrow your friend's gun and
>carry it on the seat next to you?  I'm going on a trip soon, and plan on
>carrying a handgun for personal protection.  I'll be traveling through
>several states.  

>Any help would be appreciated.

I believe it is ok, as long as your destinition state/city doesn't
have any laws against your possession of a handgun.

I believe the 1986 McClure-Volkmer law protects you from law-enforcement
harassment while you are in route to your destination.

I believe that the law also says it is ok to  have it in your car,
provided it is not readily accessable & useable.  That would defeat your
purpose then, wouldn't it?

Call the BATF & ask them to send you a redbook.
-- 
John Wallace   ||   INTERNET: csjohn@knuth.mtsu.edu
> > We have just the government that we deserve < <      
Newsgroups: talk.politics.medicine,talk.abortion,alt.activism,alt.feminism,soc.women
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.medicine,sci.skeptic,alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: APA and Homosexuality
Date: 30 Dec 92 20:32:05 GMT
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Followup-To: talk.politics.medicine,alt.politics.homosexuality
Organization: University of Chicago

In article <C012vt.72K@umassd.edu> pmsc13sg@UMASSD.EDU writes:
>In article <1992Dec23.005116.29281@midway.uchicago.edu>, thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank) writes:
>>In article <BzoG7o.3p6@umassd.edu> pmsc13sg@UMASSD.EDU writes:
>
>>>Also, the Am. Psychiatric Assoc. permitted itself to be lobbied and intimi-
>>>dated by homo. activists around 1970 and, without new science, changed their
>>>public judgement about the psy. unhealthiness of homo.
>>
>>Of course the original judgement of the APA was hardly based on "science"
>>to begin with, but rather on Christian social norms.  There's no reason 
>>to think that either of their public judgements are accurate.
>
>    You have committed the logical fallacy of irrelevant conclusion.
>    Please provide evidence that the original APA judgement that homosexuality 
>is psy. illness is _based_ on Christianity. 

Please provide evidence that the APA judgments were based on *anything*.

>Did APA 
>explicitly appeal to Christianity or to science? I suspect you made hasty
>generalization. Can you cite those studies which APA used (to classify homo.
>as illness) and which, if I understand you, appeal to Christianity rather than
>lab, clinic, etc. Don't get me wrong. Science is based, not on itself, but on 
>philosophy. This philosophy may be true or false but it guides research. One
>application of philosophy is religion and this might have guided the APA or the
>scientists whose work justified the APA claim that homo. is sick. Maybe or
>maybe not. Can you prove it?
>    Can homo. be classified as sick _independent_ of religion? That's my point.
>Or, rather, has it been done? 

To my knowledge, homosexuality has not been classified as sick by any
science more advanced than phrenology.

>tainty which comes from dealing with a rational universe."
>                                                              AYN RAND

Ah, this explains many things.  You've got RANDS (Rejectanous Acquired
Neuron Deficiency Syndrome).  My condolences. (Apologies to Matthew
Weiner.)
-- 
ted frank                     | thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu 
standard disclaimers          | void where prohibited
the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
Newsgroups: talk.politics.medicine,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: maynard@leah.msc.cornell.edu (Maynard J. Handley)
Subject: Re: APA and Homosexuality
Organization: Cornell-Materials-Science-Center
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 05:50:56 GMT

>>>Also, the Am. Psychiatric Assoc. permitted itself to be lobbied and
>intimi-
>>>>dated by homo. activists around 1970 and, without new science, changed
>their
>>>>public judgement about the psy. unhealthiness of homo.
>>>
>>>Of course the original judgement of the APA was hardly based on
>"science"
>>>to begin with, but rather on Christian social norms.  There's no reason
>>>>to think that either of their public judgements are accurate.
>>
>>    You have committed the logical fallacy of irrelevant conclusion.
>>    Please provide evidence that the original APA judgement that
>homosexuality 
>>is psy. illness is _based_ on Christianity. 
>
>Please provide evidence that the APA judgments were based on *anything*.

>>    Can homo. be classified as sick _independent_ of religion? That's my
>point.
>>Or, rather, has it been done? 
>
>To my knowledge, homosexuality has not been classified as sick by any
>science more advanced than phrenology.

I'd be interested in hearing about the views of the APA on this and why
they changed, and not on the flame war that certain individuals seem intent
on propagating. Certainly I can say this: 

Over winter I'm staying in a communal house (not my usual lodgings) and a
few days ago was looking through the piles of books all over the place. I
cam across an early 70s (1970? 1972?) copy of "Everything you want to know
about sex (but were afraid to ask)." Flipping through this I was very
surprised to see the way homosexuality was treated. We were given a brief
description of "what homosexuals do", "how homosexuals cruise" then a
discussion on how 
"homosexuality can be cured" with the help of a psychiatrist.

This looks to me like a fairly strong indication that at least some
psychiatrists at the time thought of homosexuality as a disease. 
Now maybe you think psychiatry is no more advanced than phrenology. If so,
then say so and bow out of the discussion. The S/N ratio on ths group is
way too high, but some of us would like to know the reasoning of the APA
before and after and have little interest in whether such-and-such a poster
is rabid homophobe or gay rights supporter.

Maynard Handley
Newsgroups: talk.politics.medicine
From: starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr)
Subject: Re: Why The FDA is a Mass Murderer
Organization: UDel, School of Life & Health Sciences
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 06:50:18 GMT

In article <1992Dec23.052232.9268@midway.uchicago.edu> thf2@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
}In article <1992Dec23.043016.9825@genie.slhs.udel.edu> starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr) writes:
}>But the Life Extension Foundation ([advertising deleted]), a
}>pesky smaller outfit, will send you a bottle of aspirin with beta-carotene
}>(a combination that in the PHS reduced the risk for those with pre-existing
}>cardiovascular disease by 100% - another result the FDA won't let any company
}>tell you about) for a $25 contribution to its First Amendment litigation
}>fund.  The label contains the PHS claims about aspirin that the FDA has
}>declared verboten.
}
}Wow!  Reduces risk 100%!  Or, in other words, prevents it completely, right?
}(After all, that's what "reduces risk 100%" means.)  Gee, with such accuracy
}in advertising, I wonder why the FDA still insists on approving advertising
}of health claims?

You've gotten your attributions wrong.  I
didn't write that, Alan Bock of the Orange County Register did.  I posted the
article.

}Why don't you tell us how many people died from quack medicines that FDA
}policy has kept off the shelves?

Why don't you explain why it's such a good thing that medicines that have been
approved in other industrialized countries haven't been here (e.g., piracetam,
thalidomide)?  Why don't you try justifying this breach of caveat emptor?

Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! - Think Universally, Act Selfishly
starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu

"True greatness consists in the use of a powerful understanding to enlighten
oneself and others." - Francois Marie Arouet Voltaire
Newsgroups: talk.politics.medicine
From: schumach@convex.com (Richard A. Schumacher)
Subject: Re: More Evidence Against the FDA
Organization: CONVEX Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx., USA
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 00:18:05 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

[whining about impending reduction of laissez-faire in alternative
"medicine" deleted]

How quickly they forget. Do you want repetitions of the L-tryptophan
fiasco of 4 years back? Scores of people were killed or left permamently
paralyzed to various degrees by a large, faulty batch of the stuff. 
Protecting an ignorant populace from baseless or fraudulent health
claims is PRECISELY why the "D" is in the FDA!

Christ on a minibike, why not repeal all traffic laws while you're at it?
Newsgroups: talk.politics.medicine
From: bhjelle@carina.unm.edu ()
Subject: Re: AIDS risk/Duesberg
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 00:04:07 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

In article <C01DJ3.5DF@umassd.edu> pmsc13sg@UMASSD.EDU writes:
>
>
>    You have not causally linked premise and conclusion. I have asked if D's
>claim that there is NO peer-reviewd paper proving HIV causes AIDS can be con-
>tradicted. No has identified any such paper. In the context of my knowledge,
>therefore, HIV does not cause AIDS. The gauntlet has been thrown!

The 3 back-to-back Science papers by Gallo's lab in 1984 proved
that HIV causes AIDS.
>
>    "Other people do have that virus but AIDS patients have it more often...,"
>says D. (_Full Context_, Feb. 1992)

Other people have liver disease, but people with hepatitis B virus
have it more often. Other people have mononucleosis-like diseases,
but those with EBV have it more often. How does the HIV-AIDS 
connection differ from any other extremely well-documented
pathogenic effect of a microorganism?

>    D says, "HIV by itself, causes no disease whatsoever in most infections."

Wrong. HIV, acting alone, causes acute meningoencephalitis,
pharyngitis, and AIDS dementia; possibly diarrhea as well.
Given enough time, many people feel that a large majority
of HIV+ people will develop AIDS dementia. This doesn't happen
because so many die earlier from opportunistic infections.
>    
>    On Sunday, TV's "60 Minutes" and Dec. 29 _NYT_ had stories on 
>stress-illness link. It would be odd, queer even, if homosexuals into long-
>term drug "lifestyle" (ie, deathstyle) did NOT get sick.

I wish your suppositions and guesses were a sufficient substitute
for real data, but they are not. What do you know about the
effects of drugs on the body, or of the drug `lifestyle'?

Brian

Newsgroups: talk.politics.medicine,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: entropy@world.std.com (The Entropic one)
Subject: Re: APA and Homosexuality
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 01:36:09 GMT

In article <C0Aww2.M6q@umassd.edu> pmsc13sg@UMASSD.EDU writes:
>
>SG	I appreciate your respect for reason.
>
>	I think one must get very basic, perhaps even philosophical, to 
>understand homo. Human nature is the key here. Humans are bio. hetero. I don't 
>think anyone denies this. 

The jury is still out but most evidence leans toward homosexuality being
inborn. Given the fact that very few mammals are exclusively heterosexual
it seems improbable that humans are "made" to be only heterosexual. 

If you want to attribute homosexuality to the "evils of society" then you 
had better be ready to explain its presense in other animals. 

>That is, whatever one's emotions, even the homosexual 
>is a member of a species which is bio. hetero. 

This is a meaningless statement without proof that humans are biologically
hetero (not to mention a clear definition of bio. hetero. would be nice).

>Psy. health requires psy. 
>contact with this fact rather than repression or suppression of it.

But since humans are infact both heterosexual, homosexual and bisexual then
good psy. health requires contact with this fact rather than repression
or suppression of it....

-- 
------  Linux, Religion, and electronic shopping all in one place!
\    / Repent of Bean eating, MS-DOS, OS/2, and windows NT, no sales man
 \  / will hassle you, no priest will sacrifice you. Free 9600 baud download.
  \/ Call the Virtual World Information Systems BBS at 508-793-9568        
Newsgroups: talk.politics.medicine,alt.politics.homosexuality