HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: alane@microsoft.com (Alan Ezekiel)
Subject: Re: NSW homicides
Date: 09 Oct 92 16:52:03 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

> Tim Lambert and Charles Scripter write:
>|> 
>|> > Huh!?  19 degrees of freedom!  That's enough to least-square fit
>|> > an elephant!
>|> 
>|> Explain to us how 19 df allow you to "fit an elephant".

I am surprised that no one has yet answered this simple question.

In order to fit an elephant with 19 degrees of freedom, you wrap six
over the body, two around each leg, one on each ear, and use the last
three to cover the trunk.

Voila!  An excellent fit!

                               -- Alane --
   /-----------------------------------------------------------------\
  /   NOBODY shares my opinions,    |    "I am a jelly doughnut"      \
 /    especially not my employer    |    -- President John F Kennedy   \
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------\
Xref: sparky talk.politics.guns:22206 alt.conspiracy:11329 alt.fan.dan-quayle:5488 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:6969 talk.bizarre:34346
From: gmr6139@ultb.isc.rit.edu (G.M. Richard)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,alt.conspiracy,alt.fan.dan-quayle,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.bizarre
Subject: Re: Language Devaluation Question...
Date: 16 Oct 92 02:58:45 GMT
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology
Originator: gmr6139@ultb

>easy one... 
>
>they're Justified,
>and they're Ancient,
>and they come from Mu-mu land
>
>... see ?
>

sounds like my last girlfriend...


-- 
  _  _                __                         gmr6139@ultb.isc.rit.edu
 /| /|  __  _/__/_   /__) ' __  /_  __ ,_  __/  gmr6139@george.cs.rit.edu
/ |/ |_/-/__/__/____/ \__/_/___/ /_/-/_/__/_/  gmr6139@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
____________________________________________  gmr6139@ritlav.isc.rit.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: tmi@netcom.com (Peter Alan Kasler)
Subject: Re: A little on self defense (what should I carry ?)
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 07:49:36 GMT

In <1992Oct8.222727.18432@news.eng.convex.com> cash@convex.com (Peter Cash) writes:

>In article <4400257@iftccu.boeing.com> bressler@iftccu.boeing.com (Rick Bressler) writes:
>...
>[ Stuff about having attended Ayoob's course being a good thing if you ever
>have to go to trial for a justified shooting...]

>But is it, really? Let me, in the cause of intellectual inquiry, assume the
>role of _advocatus diaboli_ -- er, I mean state prosecutor:

>"And so you see, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, this mad-dog killer that
>sits before you and who wilfully murdered the poor, disadvantaged victim
>who was searching his house at 3 AM for some edible scraps is a TRAINED
>KILLER. By his own admission, he attended a gun-fighting school run by that
>well-known paranoid, Massad Ayoob--the same Massad Ayoob whom you just
>heard admit has testified on behalf of his students in no less than 387
>shoothing trials THIS YEAR ALONE.

>"Clearly, attending what we can only call "Massad Ayoob's School of Death"
>PROVES BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that the accused was obsessed with guns
>and killing, and was only waiting for a chance to blow away a poor
>disadvantaged individual. Consider how meticulously the accused has kept
>his notes--in a bank safety deposit box, no less. Surely this is an
>indication of an obsessed and paranoid mentality.

>"Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, society will only be safe if we lock
>away all the graduates of this insidious Academy of Assassins. I urge you
>to throw this guy in jail and lose the key."

>[ exit prosecutor ]

	No offense, but you seem to have been watching too much
television and too many movies. 

	Massad's school cannot fairly and rationally be characterized
as you have above, and no student could be so described merely for
having attended. Quite the contrary, assuming a qualified defense team.

	Understand that although Massad is a friend, he is also a
competitor (although my school is better :^) -- no flames here), and
what I wrote above is not merely my opinion but fact based on actual
experience.

>-- 
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>             |      Die Welt ist alles, was Zerfall ist.     |
>Peter Cash   |       (apologies to Ludwig Wittgenstein)      |cash@convex.com
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-- 
     Peter Alan Kasler                            Fax: 707-939-8684
     Threat Management Institute                Voice: 707-939-0303
     800 West Napa Street                     TMI BBS: 707-935-1713
     Sonoma, CA  95476                     Internet: tmi@netcom.com
From: romigr@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re:Gun Control
Date: 14 Oct 92 16:42:23 EST

In his article he writes  "gun control"

Does he mean gun control is putting six out of six rounds in the bullseye!
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: cotera@woods.ulowell.edu
Subject: Re: NRA Evaluation of Bush and Clinton
Organization: University of Lowell
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 14:36:02 GMT

In article <1992Oct7.190630.28538@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>, clc5q@uvacs.cs.Virginia.EDU (Clark L. Coleman) writes:
> 
> A recent article in a Richmond, VA, newspaper said that the NRA was holding out
> on endorsing Bush because of his past sins, and because they hope to make him
> work a little bit for an endorsement (i.e. make some new public commitments
> regarding gun control.)  As a result, they are working primarily on creating
> a Congress that can resist gun control efforts by Bill Clinton while pushing
> Bush to do something to get an endorsement.
> 

My suggestion for the NRA is to support the Libertarian Party.  Marrou could
use an extra 3 million votes.
--Ray Cote
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: draughn@iitmax.iit.edu (Mark Draughn)
Subject: Re: RKRB .sigs
Organization: Illinois Institute of Technology
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 92 20:27:23 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.150550.24233@u.washington.edu>
toby@carson.u.washington.edu (Toby Bradshaw) writes:
>Several people have suggested that a collection of .sig lines on
>the right to keep and read books might be amusing.  Here are some
>of mine, and I'm looking forward to additions from the net.

From my random .sig file:

"You didn't hear Elliot Ness whining about Al Capone's machine gun."
-- Leroy Pyle on Assault Rifles

"The 2nd amendment was never intended to allow private citizens to
 'keep and bear arms'.  If it had, there would have been wording such as
 'the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.'"
-- Ken Konecki on Usenet, on 27 Jul 1992
-- 

Mark Draughn    | <draughn@iitmax.iit.edu> or <SYSMARK@IITVAX> on BITNET
----------------+ Academic Computing Center, Illinois Institute of Technology
+1 312 567 5962 | 10 W. 31st Street, Chicago, Illinois  60616
 
"...[W]e are an NPR station but feature modern music, including rap,
 metal, and alternative rock. We play the balancing act---or try to---
 between legal and creative programming."    [dashes added]
--Mike Black, General Manager, WEOS(FM) on FCC content restrictions
From: miriah@loro-next.Stanford.EDU (Claire Bacher)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Gun Control
Date: 14 Oct 92 03:15:02 GMT
Organization: DSO, Stanford University

Gun Control !!!
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: holger@vmars.tuwien.ac.at (Holger Reusch (Dipl. Gerhard + Joe))
Subject: Re: Freaks And Self-Defense
Organization: Technical University Vienna, Dept. for Realtime Systems, AUSTRIA
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 15:11:10 GMT

And I bet 10:1 that the car theft/assault/etc. rate at Knob Creek
is somewhat below average for the duration of the gathering... :-|

>How about the several hundred thousand cops and other armed agents?
>Granted that many of them are slobs of the first order and do indeed
>shoot LOTS of innocent people every year, but your average beat cop
>does not seem to murdering civilians by the dozen as would be expected
>by those who claim that EvilAssaultHandguns(tm) cause people to become
>blood thirsty homicidal psychopaths.

Well, granted that guns make it easier for maniacs to kill people, they
make it easier to stop maniacs, too.  If only one person had been armed
at the Killeen (sp?) shooting, woe to the loonie.

Naive question: What's the best cure against a freak with a gun?

-- 
| Holger Reusch                             |
| Technical University of Vienna, Austria <-+--- No kangaroos here,
| Dept. for Real-Time Systems               |    sorry!
| holger@vmars.tuwien.ac.at                 |
From: kossack@owlnet.rice.edu (Jordan Marc Kossack)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Does This Law Make Sense
Date: 12 Oct 92 00:07:54 GMT
Reply-To: kossack@qvi.com
Distribution: usa
Organization: Rice University

In article <viking.718744875@vincent2.iastate.edu> viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson) writes:
- 	And you'll also note that this is not generally considered a
- reason to be allowed a CCW.  The police just think you ought to openly
- display your guns so you no longer have a concealed weapon.  Thus,

	Well, Texas law does not make a legal distinction whether 
   the handgun is carried openly or concealed, nor does it make a 
   distinction whether or not the handgun is loaded.   

-- 
 Jordan M Kossack  |  kossack@qvi.com  | +1 713 240 2073  |  I am the TSRA  
  
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,alt.politics.clinton
From: kossack@owlnet.rice.edu (Jordan Marc Kossack)
Subject: Re: The true defense of gun ownership
Followup-To: talk.politics.guns
Keywords: Guns,Constitution,Militia
Organization: Rice University
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 04:01:12 GMT

In article <Bw0CBq.5vH@world.std.com> rjk@world.std.com writes:
- However, I am distressed by the willful misunderstanding of the second
- ammendment to the U.S. Constitution. This ammendment is about militias,
- not private gun ownership.

	Pardon me, but who in tarnation do you think makes up the  
   militia?  A standing army is not a militia.  As a libertarian, 
   I presume that you have read the Federalist Papers.  Do recall 
   the term "posse comitatus"?  (I'm not talking about Kohl :-) 
   Why do you seem to think that the "people" mentioned in the 2nd 
   Amendment are a different people than those referred to in the 
   1st, 4th, 9th, and 10th Amendments.



In DRED SCOTT Chief Justice Taney, writing for the court's majority, 
stated that if balcks were "entitled to the privileges and immunities 
of citizens... [i]t would give persons of the negro race, who were 
recognized as citizens in any one state of the union, the right... to 
keep and carry arms wherever they went.  And all of this would be done   
in the face of the subject race of the same color, both free and slaves, 
and inevitably producing discontent and insubordination among them, and 
endangering the peace and safety of the state..." 
                                             --  Roy Innis
                                 From The Wall Street Journal 11/21/91

        Obviously the Supreme Court thought that the people had an    
   individual right to keep and bear arms.  Otherwise, why the worry?  


-- 
 Jordan M Kossack  |  kossack@qvi.com  | +1 713 240 2073  |  I am the TSRA  
  
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: mikepb@lupus.dell.com (Michael P. Brininstool)
Subject: Re: Constitutional Questions, and liberalisms....
Reply-To: mikepb@lupus.dell.com
Organization: Dell UNIX Support
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 20:39:05 GMT

In article <1992Oct10.032307.2751@ncsu.edu>, hes@unity.ncsu.edu (Henry E. Schaffer) writes:
|> tax rates paid by the middle class.  (Haven't you ever wondered about
|> the great amount of attention paid to such things as the capital gains
|> tax rates and the tax treatment of donated appreciated assets?  These
|> relate to things which directly benefit the wealthy and which are of
|> relatively little benefit to the middle and lower classes.)  This is

You are wrong!  You obviously do NOT know what a capital gains tax is.
You have swallowed the liberal line about "capitol gains", hook, line, and
sinker!  Have you ever sold a house?  Did you know that the tax rate on
"capitol gains" is something like 40% - no matter what your income tax
bracket is!  Anytime you sell something, and make a profit, THAT IS A
"CAPITOL GAIN."  why should EVERYONE pay 40% on a profit they make.  It is
a kind of incentive to NOT make money.  Doesn't sound very capitalistic to
me, nor helpful to any economy, except those who have nothing worth
selling.  Do you think only the wealthy sell things for a profit?

------------------------------++----------------------------------------------|
| #include "std/disclaimer.h" || MICHAEL P. BRININSTOOL mikepb@lupus.dell.com |
|-----------------------------++--------++------------------------------------|
| IF LIBERALS INTERPRETED THE 2ND       || "An armed society is a polite      |
| AMENDMENT, THE WAY THEY DO THE FIRST, ||  society!"  -- Heinlein            |
| CARRYING A GUN WOULD BE MANDATORY!    ||                                    |
|---------------------------------------++-------------------------------------
From: donb@igor.tamri.com (Don Baldwin)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Constitutional Questions, and liberalisms....
Date: 16 Oct 92 20:57:10 GMT
Organization: TOSHIBA America MRI, South San Francisco, CA

In article <ATAYLOR.92Oct16082104@von_neumann.nmsu.edu> ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy)
writes:
><In article <1992Oct13.181026.22134@jetsun.weitek.COM> nadja@jetsun.weitek.COM
>(Nadja Adolf) writes:

><Since when is Brady and his bunch liberal? Brady was an official in Reagan's
><white house, and is hardly liberal by any stretch of the imagination. Reagan
><supported the bill, too.
>	
>	Begging the question; the majority of congresscritters
>	who are identified as "liberal" voted in favor of Brady.
>	Indeed, the majority of people polled by Gallup who
>	self-identified as "liberal" support Brady: thus,
>	the previous posters assertion about "liberals" is
>	false.

Hi Nosy,

Another data point:  I also identify myself as liberal, yet I'm completely
pro-RKBA.

><   I am considered very liberal, and I oppose ALL restrictions on any civil
><   right. I like all 10 Amendments in the Bill of Rights, not just nos. 2 and
><   4.
>
>	Fine. That makes you a non-average liberal; it proves
>	nothing about the vast majority of people who self-
>	identify as "liberal"...those people *like* rules
>	which favor the politically connected.

Some of the more outrageous Liberals would outlaw guns if they could; some
of the more outrageous Conservatives would outlaw abortion and information
about contraceptives, if they could.  They're all assholes, frankly.

             don
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm a Conservative's worst nightmare:  a Liberal who likes guns and
dreams of seeing Reagan and Bush sharing a cell in Leavenworth!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don Baldwin  -  Software Engineer  - e-mail to:  donb@tamri.com
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: The NRA and GHW Bush (Was: NRA Evaluation of Bush and Clinton)
Date: 12 Oct 92 21:52:24 GMT
	<1992Oct9.093602.1@woods.ulowell.edu>
	<PA146008.366.718657974@utkvm1.utk.edu>
Distribution: usa
Organization: NMSU Computer Science

<In article <PA146008.366.718657974@utkvm1.utk.edu> PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu (David Veal) writes:
<   In article <1992Oct9.093602.1@woods.ulowell.edu> cotera@woods.ulowell.edu writes:

<>In article <1992Oct7.190630.28538@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>, clc5q@uvacs.cs.Virginia.EDU (Clark L. Coleman) writes:
<>> 
<>> A recent article in a Richmond, VA, newspaper said that the NRA was holding out
<>> on endorsing Bush because of his past sins, and because they hope to make him
<>>work a little bit for an endorsement (i.e. make some new public commitments
<>>regarding gun control.)  As a result, they are working primarily on creating
<>>a Congress that can resist gun control efforts by Bill Clinton while pushing
<>> Bush to do something to get an endorsement.
 
	That is an accurate assessment. Note that gun owners were
	critical in Texas (which was critical in general) to Bush's
	1988 success.


<>My suggestion for the NRA is to support the Libertarian Party.  Marrou could
<>use an extra 3 million votes.

	There are NRA members who agree with you. However,
	NRA endorsements require a *lot* of support. 

<	A couple of points:

<	A)  Supporting the Libertarians may just help to enhance the NRA's
<   "lunatic fringe" image

	Given the media's bias, this is almost guaranteed.

<	B)  Not all NRA members are hard-core RKBA advocates (George Bush is
<   merely the most amusing example) nor are they all civil liberty advocates
<   beyond guns.  Many would consider the NRA support of a party other than,
<   say, the Republicans, as insulting.

	I question this; I don't know any NRA members who are 	
	totally "died in the wool" Republicans at all costs.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: mpetro@brtph126.bnr.ca (Myron Petro P030)
Subject: Re: Supreme Court allows New Jersey gun seizure law
Keywords: supreme court, legal, gun control, social issues, state  government, government
Organization: BNR, Inc. Research Triangle Park, NC
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1992 12:05:23 GMT

 >Stephen D. Grant asked a question about the guy traveling through
 > New Jersey.
 Stephen, the Mclure-Volmer act states that the firearm and Ammo must be
 in seperate locked containers. That of course wouldn't stop Nazi Jersey
 state police from doing what they did anyway. I sent a year and a half in
 that hell hole back in the late 70's. Believe me the police do whatever they 
 want and the court backs them up. Cops in local towns will carry things like
 rolling papers to drop in your car so they can do a complete search. They make
 you step to the back of your car and while one cop questions you the other 
 looks in the car from the outside. He then says I found something, reaches
 in the car comes back with the rolling papers, and informs you he now has 
 probable cause to search the entire car. 
  My sisters friend got stopped every morning for a "registration check" the 
 cop would search her car and hit her up for a date. She tried to get an 
 harrassement charge against the cop and 2 lawyers told her the same thing she
 would be wasting her money. NJ law said that a cop can stop anyone anytime any
 where for registration and insurance check. 
   
Myron Petro
  NRA, USPSA 


 ***************************************************************

 The opinions included in this post are my sole responsibility.
 And are protected by the First Ammendment and guarnteed by the 
 Second.
From: betz@gozer.idbsu.edu (Andrew Betz)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: NRA ratings, party affiliation, and voting strategy
Date: 14 Oct 92 16:53:56 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: SigSauer Fan Club

In article <1992Oct13.223958.16331@mdd.comm.mot.com> booth@mdd.comm.mot.com (Greg Booth) writes:
>Just wondering, how low is Idaho's murder rate and violent
>crime rate? 

i can't give you specifics, but i'm sure its way below the national
average for both murder and violent crime.

>Hmm, Anti-gun candidates in areas with high murder rates (Washington d.c.,
>New York, Chicago...) that go up with the election of anti-gun politicians, 
>and pro-gun candidates in areas with low crime rates. 
>HCI-logic would mean that anti-gun candidates cause high crime rates !;-)
>
>No?
>
yes, perhaps indirectly.  if anti-gunners pass legislation disarming
law-abiding citizens, then criminals can operate without fear of
countervailing force.  then again, HCI isn't about stopping crime
or violence.  its about people control.

drew 
--
betz@gozer.idbsu.edu
*** brought into your terminal from the free state of idaho ***
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: ayr@gtech.com (Aleksey Y. Romanov)
Subject: gun control and totalitarism
Organization: GTECH Corporation, West Greenwich RI
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 18:36:06 GMT



Header says it all. What is attitude of totalitariam states
toward guns ?


I can provide an information about xUSSR. Total weapons control:

             All weapons prohibited including knives and martial
             art instruction, discharged paratroopers who had some
             achivements in martial arts should register
             with a police.  The smoth-bore guns are available
             only to registered hunters and should be reregistered
             every year. The procedure to became a registered hunter
             was extremely hard. How do you like a year of waiting ?

-- 
Aleksey Y. Romanov

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed are entirely my own and do not
necessary reflect those of my employer or anyone else
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: kossack@owlnet.rice.edu (Jordan Marc Kossack)
Subject: Re: So... Why have a standing military?
Followup-To: alt.politics.elections
Reply-To: kossack@qvi.com
Organization: Draft Dodgers for Quayle and Clinton
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 15:17:24 GMT

In article <84732@bcsaic.boeing.com> rwojcik@atc.boeing.com writes:
- I don't equate "organizing and training" per se with vigilantism.  I do 
- that a self-organized military force, answerable to no civil authority, 
- danger to everyone.  It creates the potential for vigilantism and compet 

      Hmmm.  Do you mean the police departments without a civilian 
   review board?  Considering the weapons carried (why do police 
   need full-auto weapons if civilians don't - they face the exact 
   same group of criminals, no?) and the tactics (military-style 
   assaults and no-knock raids) used by many police departments in 
   the United States, it seems that your fears have been realized. 
   So, tell me, when will you advocate disbanding the police?   

- Soviets used to encourage--civilian "volunteers" who went after public d
- and other "hooligans".  Of course, they broke some noses that didn't bel
- to hooligans, but, hey, they were just volunteers helping to keep public 

	Oooh!  Sounds like the Rodney King incident.  

	Again, when are we going to disarm/disband the police?  

-- 
 Jordan M Kossack  |  "From each according to his naivete, 
  kossack@qvi.com  |   to each according to his greed"  
  +1 713 240 2073  |                         -- Jeff Orrok   
  
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: schabel@calspan.com (Dave Schabel)
Subject: Re: Brady Bill squashed and other news
Keywords: Brady, Good riddance
Organization: Calspan Advanced Technology Center
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 22:15:42 GMT

In article <1992Oct5.222834.22681@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> clc5q@hemlock.cs.Virginia.EDU (Clark L. Coleman) writes:
>
Regarding the late Brady Bill:
>We had an up or down, recorded vote on a gun control bill that had little
>of importance outside of gun control.  The Republicans killed it.  That
>seems to fit the criteria I asked for recently concerning the supposed
>lack of difference between the parties.
>
>As for it being close, of course it was.  Take 40 or so of the 57 pinkos
>from the Democratic Party, add in a couple of Republican pinkos like John
>Chafee of Rhode Island and the eunuchs from Oregon, and it is a close one.
>But, a bill as described would have been vetoed, and the pinkos were not
>even close to 67 votes so they could override it, were they?
>
It would have been vetoed under the current administration.  If Clinton
wins, though, you can bet it can become a law with 16 fewer votes
necessary in the Senate.  %^(  

We _must_ either make sure Slick Willie stays in Arkansas, or build
a Clinton-proof Congress.  There is a third alternative, but I
hate to think about it.

				Dave Schabel
				schabel@calspan.com


Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.drugs
From: shaffer@achilles.ctd.anl.gov (Michael A. Shaffer)
Subject: Re: The Declaration of Independence, Rev 2.0
Organization: Argonne National Laboratory
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 18:25:36 GMT

Thanks John. It brought tears to my eyes. It is unfortunately all true.

				mike