HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: c1741@moncol.monmouth.edu (MICHAEL CARSON)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Freedom of Religion as well as everything else
Date: 26 Aug 92 18:56:51 GMT
Organization: Monmouth College, W. Long Branch, N.J.  07764


	O.K. I can basically forget about moving there.  From the sound of
it, it will be no better than the US will be if Bush gets in control again.
Or maybe worse, what with those labor camps and all.
	This is what I was talking about in my rants on organized
rebelion.  If the country changes for the worse it is OUR reposibility to
see that it goes right again, working within the system.  When that proves
impossible, we must be prepared to either live outside the law, with
all the inherent dangers, or deal with it, or to fight to change the 
system, from OUTSIDE.  Anybody who chooses this last course had best be 
prepared to win or die, or perhaps both.

|o|\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/|o|
|o| Of Course I speak  |      michael carson       | Carpe Diem, Man.        |o|
|o|  only for myself.  | c1741@moncol.monmouth.edu |                -me      |o|
|o| Would YOU let me   +---------------------------+-------------------------|o|
|o|  speak for you?!?  |      All flames to: nobody@moncol.monmouth.edu      |o|
|o|\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/|o|
Xref: sparky talk.politics.guns:20245 alt.politics.clinton:3276 alt.politics.bush:3218
From: fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary)
Subject: Re: 2nd Amendment Myths
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 23:31:28 GMT

I'm afraid Andy Freeman and C. D. Tavares have been preaching to
the converted (though doing a good job of it): Mr. Wojcike redirected
follow-ups to talk.politics.guns only, so the people on talk.politics.misc
have been seeing only one side of the discussion.

                                                Frank Crary
                                                CU Boulder
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: meyers@leonardo.rtp.dg.com (Bill Meyers)
Subject: Re: Why a sawed-off shotgun?
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 21:39:39 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: N/I

In article <BtK0v9.9wJ@hsi.com> bobwest%code3@uunet.UU.NET (Bob Westover) writes:
[ ... ]
>It has come to my attention that Mr Weaver's "crime" was having a shotgun
>barrel too short by *** .1 inch ***. Certainly justification for all the
>bloodshed that has and will occur over the matter. [sarcasm off]

As Justice Souter remarked in UNITED STATES v. THOMPSON/CENTER ARMS CO
(posted here as <1992Jun18.102403.14850@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>):

        "A maker [of an NFA firearm] who fails to comply with the NFA's
        provisions is subject to criminal penalties of up to 10 years'
        imprisonment and a fine of up to $10,000, or both, which may be
        imposed without proof of willfulness or knowledge."

In other words, they don't have to prove you did it on purpose, or even
that you knew what happened.  It's off to the slammer.  Have a nice life.

Xref: sparky talk.politics.guns:20374 alt.society.civil-disob:85
From: osan@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (Mr. X)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,alt.society.civil-disob
Subject: Re: Black Market guns
Date: 31 Aug 92 19:37:26 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Twilight Zone

In article <1992Aug31.001419.23139@iitmax.iit.edu> technews@iitmax.iit.edu (Kevin Kadow) writes:
>
>Current production ammo, if sealed in tins, has an almost infinite lifespan.
>The components to handload ammunition are stockpiled by many people, and
>while it takes a lot more technical competence to manufacture shells from
>scratch (primers,casings, propellant and bullets), it can (and will) be
>done.
>-- 

	Actually it is not that hard to make workable ammo, even from absolute
	scratch.  Cotton and nitric acid will provide all the smokeless 
	powder you could ask for, though of course this will be a bit quicker
	burning and only single base, but so what.  If I'm only getting 700
	fps out of my .45 instead of 980... well I'm not sure it will make
	that big a difference given the circumstances under which we'd be
	operating.

	As for casings I can think of two methods that would be readily doable.
	Turning them on an engine lathe or casting them.  The lathe will be
	able to produce good accurate cases but would also take a lot of time
	and waste a lot of brass from all the chips.  Investment castings
	could be turned out by the thousands with even the most primitive 
	casting apparatus.  The castings can be finished by boring the primer
	pocket and flash hole and then sending the casting through a sizing die
	to bring it up to proper dimension and to work harden the metal.

	Primers would present the biggest problem WRT packaging.  Chlorate
	primers would be easy to make, chemically speaking.  Dunno about
	lead styphnate though.  Anyone?  Packaging the primers could present
	a sizeable problem, though making a drawing die for such a small
	part actuall would not be that hard.  A tool steel plate and some
	drill rod, bored, turned, groung and polished to the right sizes would
	probably work real well.  The anvil would not be much harder to 
	make either.  Such a setup in either a drill press or even better an
	old stamping machine (plenty of those around) and you'd be in business.
	With a stamping press, you could even go for respectable volumes.

	See?  I've basically solved the problem of making ammo from scratch
	and I'm not even that bright :).  Imagine what TRULY resouceful
	persons would be able to come up with.  Though I suppose the Guv could
	outlaw posession of all machine tools, sheet metal, drill rod, cotton,
	nitiric acid, casting apparatus, plaster, wax, carbon, sulphur, 
	water...

	-Andy V.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: kevin@cfctech.cfc.com (Kevin Darcy)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,talk.abortion
Subject: Re: democratic platform
Date: 3 Sep 92 00:43:52 GMT
Organization: Chrysler Financial Corp., Southfield, MI

In article <2a9c0e72.crud@crud.mn.org> trashman@crud.mn.org (Barry Schwartz) writes:
>In article <1992Aug24.044300.8415@rotag.mi.org>
>        kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
>
>]In article <76840@ut-emx.uucp> mikey@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Strider) writes:
>]>In article <1992Jul28.031212.26812@rotag.mi.org> kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
>]>      Under this maxim, if statute specifies one exception
>]>                                                 ^^^^^^^^^
>]>>	to a general rule or assumes to specify the effects of a certain
>]>>	provision, other exceptions or effects are excluded.
>]>
>]>The Second Amendment's first clause does not specify an *exception*.  
>]
>]Read the second part, nimrod: "...or assumes to specify the effect of a
>                       ^^^^^^
>Do you know what this word means, Kebbie?

Why do you ask? Is your on-line dictionary broken?

>]certain provision". My point is that the intended EFFECT of the 2nd Amendment 
>]RKBA is to empower the well-regulated militia to promote the security of a
>]free state. By _expressio unius est exclusio alterius_, then, we can
>]exclude all other effects of the provision, i.e. the alleged "universal"
>]RKBA does not exist.
>
>Then what of the ninth amendment, Kebbin?  To wit:  "The enumeration
>in the constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny
>or disparage others retained by the people."  

Then argue for the "universal" RKBA on 9th Amendment grounds. That's a 
strategy that might even garner my support. Just don't try to heist the
2nd Amendment. That, in contrast, is a Constitutional shortcut.

>In other words, the RKBA
>within a well-regulated militia, enumerated within the constitution,
>does not deny a general RKBA if such a right can be established a
>priori.

It doesn't deny it, no, but neither does it give it special protection, 
either. So any state who can show a "rational basis" (as opposed to 
"compelling interest", or whatever) for controlling access to firearms for 
folks not in a well-regulated militia, can do so with violating the Federal 
Constitution.

>Note, by the way, that the "right to keep and bear arms" is an
>individual right, and not the group "the right to keep arms and the
>right to bear arms."

Lucid as usual, eh, Barry?

							- Kevin
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: vojak@icebucket.stortek.com (Bill Vojak)
Subject: Re: Seattle Buy-Back Update
Originator: vojak@icebucket.stortek.com
Organization: Storage Technology Corp.
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 18:43:02 GMT

earlw@Apple.COM (Earl Wallace) writes:

>These gun "buy-back" programs are actually starting to sound like a great 
>idea.  It's not likely that anyone who knows beans about guns will turn
>their guns in (unless they have a gun that jams every 10 rounds :-) for $50.
>And people who do turn in good working guns for $50 are not using good
>judgement and might shoot themselves anyway, so it's great that they are
>turning them in.  I wouldn't want them having a gun if they're that stupid!
>As long as the taxpayer isn't funding this scheme, I have no problems with
>it.  It makes me happy to see people writing checks for such a good cause.
>I wish I could buy the guns at $55-100 and keep them for that rainy day when
>all hell breaks loose (riots, 8+ earthquakes, etc.) so I can *rent* them to
>desperate people for $500 a day ($5/round).

 Besides, that's less gun control money being spent on advertising,
 handout, newspaper/tv ads, political contributions.  Any idiot who
 sells a gun for $50 is a bozo anyway.  Let them waste their money.
 I'd rather see it spent this way instead of buying votes in Congress.

                                Bill Vojak
                                Bill_Vojak@stortek.com
                                NRA, ILA, CFC

------------------------------------------------------------
The CBS Nightly Propaganda With Dan Rather. (RATHER NOT!)
------------------------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: hays@ssd.intel.com (Kirk Hays)
Subject: Re: Free NRA memberships
Organization: Intel Supercomputer Systems Division
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 23:40:40 GMT

I don't normally followup my own postings, but I'd like to make the following
offer, since I don't make a profit, and it does benefit the NRA:

I'm a licensed "NRA retailer", which allows me to give a 40% rebate on 1 year NRA
memberships.

Essentially, you pay $25 up front, and, after the NRA rebates 40% ($10) to me,
I'll rebate it to you.

Send mail if you are interested, for yourself, or to purchase for others, and
I'll send further details.

-- 
Kirk Hays - NRA Life.
"NRA membership - the gift that keeps on giving." :-)
From: gt1111a@prism.gatech.EDU (Vincent Fox)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: FILE: UFO OCTOBER SURPRISE - C.A.C. part 2/2
Keywords: NAZI WORLD TAKEOVER PLAN - NEW WORLD ORDER
Date: 30 Aug 92 04:58:05 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In <1992Aug30.033116.25651@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> crb7q@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Cameron Randale Bass) writes:

>In article <1992Aug29.193917.15933@bilver.uucp> dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen) writes:
>>
>>----UFO NAZI OCTOBER SURPRISE - CAC part 2--------------------------------

>      Shouldn't that be CACA?  Just curious.
>                                dale bass

Come now dale be polite! Even if you do not believe it, it still has
the same sort of entertainment value to it that scanning the Star
does while waiting at the checkout. And best of all, no cheap newsprint
ink lingering on your hand! Of course, I am more than a little baffled
as to why alt.alien.visitors and talk.politics.guns are getting
regular cross-postings of it.

-- 
The War on Drugs is just part of the War on the US Constitution.
From: blayda@acsu.buffalo.edu (Danger)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Gun control in California
Keywords: n
Date: 25 Aug 92 18:32:14 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: UB

In article <71613@apple.Apple.COM> vossron@Apple.COM (Ronald N. Voss) writes:
>andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman) writes:
>
>>Voss disagrees.  He thinks that a gun law succeeded if a fatal
>>shooting is replaced by a fatal stabbing.
>
>Right.  They'll switch to drive-by stabbings.

Wrong.

There will be drive-by firebombings.  Molotov cocktail is much
more effective.  Robbers, murders and rapists who haven't the
inclination to purchase a black-market item (either due to
lack of contacts or due the confidence they have of knowing
they are stronger than their victims) will turn to knives.

There will be nothing positive about any proposed law to further
regulate guns and certainly nothing as whimsical as a "drive-by stabbing".

-- 
************************************************************************
Thaddeus Krag Blayda blayda@acsu.buffalo.edu, v063j3h4@ubvms.buffalo.edu
# Caution : DANGER #  This Country is at critical mass.
Vote Libertarian in '92!  Vote Marrou/Lord!  Vote to have your freedom back.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: meyers@leonardo.rtp.dg.com (Bill Meyers)
Subject: Re: Strong reason to vote for Bush  (was: Atlanta Journal and Constitution: an e)
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 92 15:09:27 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: N/I

In article <1992Aug31.132412.28095@hemlock.cray.com> dadams@cray.com writes:
>In article 17ppkbINNo1j@agate.berkeley.edu, fcrary@ocf.berkeley.edu (Frank Crary) writes:
[ ... ]
>If Clinton is elected, I think that we can be sure that he will be only
>too likely to nominate justices which will "balance the court" by seeking
>to rewrite the constitution.  Of course with the Democratic congress
>these nominees will be ratified only too quickly!

Sounds like fixing the "Democratic Congress" problem
would do a lot of good, whether or not you think it's
worth having Bush win in order to have Clinton lose.
--------
The 2nd Amendment is about sovereignty, not duck hunting.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: booth@mdd.comm.mot.com (Greg Booth)
Subject: Canadian NFA membership
Organization: Motorola - Mobile Data Division; Richmond, BC
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 19:53:03 GMT

 _____
|  / /|
|N/F/A|   	National Firearms Association 
 \ / / 
  \_/           
     
	
Mr. D.A. Tomlinson
National President
Headquarters:
Box 1779, Edmonton, AB	Bus: (403)439-1394
T5J 2P1  Canada		Fax: (403)439-4091

Major R.A. Laycock
Administrator and Editor
Box 4384, Station C
Calgary, Alberta, Canada  T2T 5N2
Tel: (403) 640-1110
Fax: (403) 640-1144

Yearly Membership includes

$2,000,000 liability insurance for and additional $4.50 per year
(Runs from postmark date to 01 Dec 1992)
Subscription to Canadian Hunting and Shooting Magazine (free)
Point Blank monthly newsletter.

Regular Membership  $25 
Age 65 or older     $12
Family membership   $40
Business membership $50
Club fee	    $40 or $1 per member which ever is larger.


			Membership Application
			-----------------------

Name  _________________________________________ Donation ($_____)
Address _______________________________________ No. of Members: ____
Town ____________________ Province ____________ Postal Code: _________
Telephone(____)_________
65+$12(____) Regular $25(___)  Family $40 (____) Business $50 (_____)
Club Fee $40 or 1$ per member: which ever is larger	  ($_______) 
For NFA Liability Insurance  ADD $4.50 per member covered ($_______)
						TOTAL:    ($_____)
Send application to NFA, Box 4384, Station C, Calgary, Alberta  T2T 5N2




-- 
Greg Booth BSc                        | Diligentia-Vis-Celeritas
BCAA-PCDHF-BCWF-NFA-NRA-IPSC-BCFSS    |  	Incolumitas
Motorola Mobile Data Division         | 
booth@mdd.comm.mot.com cgb003@email.comm.mot.com
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,alt.society.civil-disob
From: osan@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (Mr. X)
Subject: Re: Black Market guns
Organization: Twilight Zone
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 19:08:37 GMT

In article <6#gnvkn.nagle@netcom.com> nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle) writes:
>
>       I've given up on gun control, but ammo control has possibilities.
>Ammo has a shelf life.

	Yeah, several centuries, if properly stored.

	-Andy V.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (steve hix)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Clinton and Suicides, injuries, and Vigilantees.
Date: 26 Aug 1992 20:41:47 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: concertina

In article <4400236@iftccu.boeing.com> bressler@iftccu.boeing.com (Rick Bressler) writes:
>/ iftccu:talk.politics.guns / sybok@athena.mit.edu (The Rifleman) / 12:50 pm  Aug 24, 1992 /
>>In article <4400230@iftccu.boeing.com> bressler@iftccu.boeing.com 
>>(Rick Bressler) writes:
>>>Well, not everything you 'hear' is true.   I have in fact held my breath 
>>>until I've passed out.  (It happened to be a choice between that and
>>>breathing water.)  That is quit a bit worse than simply passing out 
>>>from gradual use of the oxygen in an enclosed area.  It wasn't so bad.
>>
>>Wait a minute.  You passed out under water and you're still twitching?
>
>I thought it would be obvious that somebody had hauled me out. 

When I was a kid, I found that I could hold my breath longer than anyone
else in the neighborhood.  (This is a feature?)

I knew from reading that when you feel that you absolutely *have* to take
a breath, you can still function for a while.

So one day I decided to see how many times I could swim across the pool
underwater. After a while, my fingers started to tingle..

Next thing I knew, I was lying by the side of the pool, having been pulled
out by my friend's sister.

If you *really* have to do this, make sure that you're 5 or younger, and
have fallen into very cold water.  Your chances are better if someone
doesn't happen to pull you out quickly.

Oh, yeah: A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of making many books there is no end...  |  What's wrong with chasing 
                       -- Eccl. 12:12    |  nebulae till 3 am?  |-(
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: cescript@mtu.edu (Charles Scripter)
Subject: Re: Premeditated Murder - Part 2 (was Re: No charges filed in SWAT killing
Organization: Michigan Technological University
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 22:16:00 GMT

In article <3-hn5ya@dixie.com>, jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond) writes:

> There are 1.67 milliseconds between rounds at 600 rpm.  On my homemade

I think your math is off.  600 rpm is 10 rounds per second, or 100
milliseconds per shot (0.1 second).

> drag racing christmas tree simulator, I can consistently hit a reaction
> time of about 450 milliseconds.  I'm told I'm pretty good.  It's kinda

I think 1/4 second response time (250 milliseconds) is considered
reasonably fast. There are some exceptional folks who can get down
in the 100-200 ms range.  This is probably why you generally can't
get less than 2 shots off.

> BTW, are we gonna talk about that fellow in Idaho and the government tactics
> used or is it considerd "OK" to hunt him down like a dog because he is
> a white supremist?

I haven't heard much, what can you guys tell me?

-- 
Charles Scripter   *   cescript@phy.mtu.edu
Dept of Physics, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI 49931
-------------------------------------------------------------------
With your one remaining eye, please do NOT look back into the laser
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: hays@ssd.intel.com (Kirk Hays)
Subject: Re: RKBA - are you missing the point?
Organization: Intel Supercomputer Systems Division
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 17:55:46 GMT

In article <81248@bcsaic.boeing.com>, rwojcik@atc.boeing.com (Richard Wojcik,snake) writes:
|> In article 3443@master.CNA.TEK.COM, richa@aspen.CNA.TEK.COM (Rich Amber) writes:
|> >The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States DOES NOT
|> >GRANT that right. The framers of the constitution felt that right was
|> >given by God. We are born with a right to defend ourselves. The 2nd
|> >simply guarantees that the Government cannot remove the right.
|> 
|> This is an important point and well worth remembering.  Our system of government
|> is based on the idea that government has no intrinsic rights.  The people cede
|> those rights to the government through the Constitution.

Still wrong - the government has neither "intrinsic rights", nor "ceded rights",
but "granted powers."

A misunderstanding of this is behind many of the misconceptions expressed on the
net of what our government can and should do.

|> In fact, it is the courts who decide what rights are yours and what rights have
|> been ceded to government.  You don't have the right to interpret the law, 
|> although you are certainly entitled to your opinion of what it means.  The
|> right of interpretation is one right that clearly is ceded to the judiciary
|> in the Constitution.

"Power of interpretation", not "right of interpretation."  Only people have
rights.  And don't try that tired, old "courts are made up of people" argument.

Actually, juries have the power of nullification, as well, not just the judiciary,
which can serve as an "all or nothing" interpretation of a law.

-- 
Kirk Hays - NRA Life.
Start your day with a little civil disobedience.  Call BATF at 1-800-ATF-GUNS or
1-800-RUN-GUNS, tell them what you think of gun grabbers and government employees
that encourage people to narc on their neighbors.  Good for the soul.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: alane@microsoft.com (Alan Ezekiel)
Subject: Re: American Federation of Teachers on School Violence
Date: 25 Aug 92 16:39:13 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

skeeter@skatter.usask.ca writes:
>
>My understanding of the "Brady Bill" (named such to evoke sympathy for 
>Mr. Brady and his wife Sarah, founder of HCI.

A very minor correction: Sarah Brady is indeed currently active in
the leadership of HCI but, to the best of my recollection, she had
no major role in its founding.

                               -- Alane --
   /-----------------------------------------------------------------\
  /   NOBODY shares my opinions,    |    "I am a jelly doughnut"      \
 /    especially not my employer    |    -- President John F Kennedy   \
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------\