HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gt1111a@prism.gatech.EDU (Vincent Fox)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Gun control (was Re: democratic platform)
Keywords: joke, very funny, haha, etc.
Date: 19 Aug 92 17:37:40 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In <14138@auspex-gw.auspex.com> johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
]In article <1992Aug18.020612.7417@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman) writes:
]|In article <14106@auspex-gw.auspex.com> johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
]|>Hmmm. Did they have rocket launchers and semi-automatic rifles when the
]|>second amendment was passed?  Just wondering?
]|
]|They had rocket launchers and they had "shoot lots of times with out
]|any user action" guns long before the American Revolution.  Semi-auto
]|is a relatively modern idea, say 1870 or so.  (Repeaters, even those
]|that work by pulling the trigger repeatedly, predate semi-autos.)

]Really?  What do they hunt with them?

Redcoats. The forces of opressi.. err good government.

]I can really be a pain in the ass sometimes...

Terrible! You should never deprecate your own opionions, no matter how
stupid or poorly thought out. You know, "I disagree with what you say sir,
but I will fight to the death for your right to say it."

-- 
The War on Drugs is just part of the War on the US Constitution. 
From: ron@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Ron Miller)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 14:20:10 GMT
Subject: Re: Carrying while hiking
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns

> hurd@fraser.sfu.ca (Peter L. Hurd) writes:
> 
> > and entering the real world.  Hunters who feel they need handguns to
> > protect themselves from bears are fools.  People who feel run afoul of
> > wild animals have no business killing what they could have avoided if they
> > weren't such ballless gorms.
> 

The complete original hasn't arrived at my site yet but-

After being stalked by a mountain lion and having his stalk luckily
interrupted by my companions returning from a sidetrip, I have begun
consistently carrying where it is legal while I am hiking.

You may not feel you have any higher purpose than becoming cat food, but
I have a few things left to do in my life.

BTW, the "mountain lions are afraid of people" line of a few years ago
is being modified by Wildlife departments everywhere. 

Ron Miller
Xref: sparky talk.politics.guns:19804 alt.politics.clinton:2501
From: pngai@adobe.com (Phil Ngai)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: CLINTON NEW TEXT: GUN CONTROL
Date: 21 Aug 92 19:18:29 GMT
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated

In article <1992Aug21.170920.7638@igor.tamri.com> donb@igor.tamri.com (Don Baldwin) writes:
>>                         CLINTON  GORE ON GUN CONTROL
>>
>>Every year, more than 20,000 Americans are killed with handguns;many thousands
>>more are injured.
>
>Aren't about half of the 20,000 suicides?  And if you take 10,000 as the
>number murdered by criminals, that's still smaller than the number of

Wait a minute. Does that quantity include criminals killing criminals?
Police killing criminals? Police killing innocent civilians? Civilians
killing criminals?

>>a responsible manner. Bill Clinton and Al Gore know that the Constitution
>>guarantees an individuals basic right to keep and bear arms, and they will
>>uphold that right.
>
>If they admit the 2nd Amendment's protection of an individual right, then
>that's a point in their favor.

I suspect Clinton thinks the 2nd protects the right to keep and bear
sporting goods.


-- 
My opinions are my own.
A right delayed is a right denied.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson)
Subject: Re: Political Assasinations (Was: No charges filed in SWAT killing)
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 07:18:27 GMT

In <b=-nxaj@dixie.com> jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond) writes:

>You don't find it unusual for someone to get horny from the act  of
>killing someone?  Do you suppose these are the kinds of people who 
>should be allowed to carry society's guns?

	Interesting point, John.  "Society's guns" can be interpreted as
the police, to which you refer, or to the militia.  Given the wide
diversity present in the defined militia, does getting a hard-on after
killing some perp mean there is a justifiable reason for removing the
RKBA from these people?  I got a hard-on in a calculus class, for crying
out loud!  I still don't know why.  Perhaps there is room for leaving the
unconscious reactions from the deliberate and conscious?

>I can tell you this.
>I've been shot at more than once.  Unlike Dan, I was fast enough to duck.

	"Hey, I wasn't ready!  Try it now, shorty!  Huh?  Try it now!" ;-)
Just another data point, all I did after being shot was tremble, puke,
and nearly pass out as the bullet was removed and the wound closed.  I
should have gone to a hospital, but in my youth I was more afraid of Mom
finding out that I was of any trauma.  I was lucky.  I did not get a
hard-on after I fired back despite being old enough to not think of
Annette as being just a Mouskateer.

>I had a whole bunch of emotions but one of them was NOT that my dick got
>hard.  If you think killing or coming close to killing is a normal
>sexual stimuli, you're a real sick puppy.

	I wonder...  It is said, and this is folklore, that the urge
to fornicate is quite high after a death.  Perhaps there is something
to both ideas that our data points don't cover?  I puked, and that's
hardly sexually exciting, but is that the average response?  My other
emotions I'd prefer to keep private, just as I suspect you do.

<Dan Sorenson, DoD #1066 |"There'll be angels on Ariels in leather>
<z1dan@exnet.iastate.edu | and chrome, Ridin' down from heaven    >
<viking@iastate.edu      | just to carry me home." -- R. Thompson >
< ISU thinks I need more education, which they provide for a fee. >

Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: donb@igor.tamri.com (Don Baldwin)
Subject: Re: No charges filed in SWAT killing
Organization: TOSHIBA America MRI, South San Francisco, CA
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 18:53:28 GMT

In article <viking.714276649@vincent1.iastate.edu> viking@iastate.edu
(Dan Sorenson) writes:
>	I really hope others are enjoying and benefiting from this little
>debate.  If you are or aren't, e-mail me.  If I get a lot of "kill it"
>responses and few "I like it" responses I'll move it to e-mail.

I know I am...

>>     Police officers are not soldiers.  They are not fighting a war.
>>Their opponents are not one like-minded foe.
>
>	They are not, agreed, and thus my reasoning that pulling a gun
>at a traffic stop is wrong.  However, in the no-knock mentioned above,
>or when the cop is arresting a murderer or the like, I feel prudence
>makes a ready weapon mandatory.

But not pointing it at an unarmed woman.

>It's not that I grant cops any special
>powers, just that I disagree with the idea that they need to be targets
>until a bona-fide threat exhibits itself.

Hmmm, I don't agree with this.  IMO, cops have special powers, by virtue
of the fact that they can walk around armed, at all times.  They can also
break into a house, given a warrant.  Those special powers have to be
treated more carefully, I think.

I also object to the idea that a cop's life is worth more than a
civilian's life...and that cop-killing is worse than any other kind of
murder.  If cops were unarmed, then they would exist for the sole
purpose of helping people and killing them would be, indeed, a very
bad thing.  As it is, they are armed at all times and we are not, so
IMO a cop who kills a civilian except in self defense, or who shoots a
a fleeing non-violent criminal, should be treated worse than someone
who shoots a cop.

Please note that I'm NOT saying that the lives of police officers are
unimportant.  All my dealings with police officers over the years
have been professional and cordial, even friendly.  However, I'm very
displeased with the current situation and the current balance of power.

    don

Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: bobd@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Bob DeBula)
Subject: Re: Colorado Does Its Part For Firearms Last Night!
Organization: The Ohio State University
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 12:27:07 GMT

In article <1992Aug13.221036.23556@hawkmoon.mn.org> gray@hawkmoon.mn.org (Bill Gray) writes:
>
>Oh, well.  Sensible Minnesotans (both of us! :-)  are grateful that other
>states are selecting better Senators than our prize, Paul (the Dweeb)
>Wellstone.  :-(
>

Sigh, not always, consider if you were from Ohio and had to
admit to having Howie Metzenbum & John "I fried my brains out
in geosynchronous orbit" Glenn as your Senators. My only
consolation is thinking of the embarrassment some folks
in Mass. must feel..... :-( :-( :-( :-(
-- 
==========================================================================
              Disclaimer: These are my views, not the U's

        "If it's in the paper it must be true!" --- D. Doright
From: blayda@acsu.buffalo.edu (Danger)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: UFO "October Surprise" and USA TAKEOVER?!
Date: 13 Aug 92 18:37:12 GMT
Organization: UB

In article <OTTO.92Aug12155011@tukki.jyu.fi> otto@tukki.jyu.fi (Otto J. Makela) writes:
>I've never felt the need to carry a gun (even though I've been in some pretty
>tight spots), and I'm glad I live in a society where I don't have to.

You must be an able-bodied male.  Consider those same tight spots from
the perspective of your wife, your girlfriend, or from the age 70...

>The fact that yearly much more people in the United States get killed by
>guns than in Europe of course has nothing to do with gun control, right ?

Right.

Europe's communities tend to be much more peaceable and homogeneous.
That alone accounts for more of the difference than gun control
differences.

-- 
************************************************************************
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: wreck@fmsrl7.srl.ford.com (R. Cage)
Subject: Re: FREE 1-YEAR NRA... enough allready!!
Summary: cthong likes police states, because he's from one?  One hopes not.
Organization: Boye, Dewey, Cheetham and Howe, Atty's.
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 15:12:20 GMT

In <cthong.713669756@sfu.ca> cthong@fraser.sfu.ca (Christopher Thong) writes:
>firstly- hold on -let me get a grip on myself-- heh- 
>I AM NOT FROM THE PEOPLES REPUBLIC OF CHINA!!
>SINGAPORE IS NOT , HAS NEVER BEEN , WILL EVER BE A CHINESE STATE!!
>HEH.HEH..AHHHMMMM..

Ah.  You're from the place which has a leadership that's so
anal-retentive, it has outlawed CHEWING GUM.

I can see why you like the idea of a police state.  You
feel at home and comfortable in one.  The disorderly nature
of free interaction makes you feel ill at ease.

If you like Singapore so much better, why are you here?

By the way, I'm not Canadian.  I'm from the USofA.

>My views on why people would feel safer in a country where firearms 
>are prohibited (private use) are supported by these points.
>- i feel safer in my country because there, i can rely on the police

We can't rely on the police, either to arrive quickly or at all.
Our population density isn't high enough to have police close by
when problems occur; delays are inevitable.  Can't do a thing
about it, yet you think we should throw away our first line of
defense?

>the cops meanwhile are only a 20 second phone call away.

If I could get a car DISPATCHED in 20 seconds, I'd be in much
better shape.  It's more like a minute or more.  Then there's
the 5 miles to the station; 5 minutes' travel at 60 MPH.  By
the time the police get here, I could be dead.

>keep your gun in your pocket? ... ha... funny.
>you obviously watch a lot of clint eastwood movies.

I hate Clint Eastwood movies.  They're so schlocky.
But yes, I'd be happy with a pocket automatic.  It
would be enough to chase thugs away, since thugs
are basically cowards.

Thugs being cowards, if it were legal for me to carry
a pocket automatic, they'd be leery of picking on you
too if you visited here.  How could they know if *you*
had one or not?

>i accept points of view from all gun enthusiasts and people who feel
>for whatever reason they NEED a gun . (protection? okay. ) 

That's a nice turnaround.  Welcome aboard the pro-choice bandwagon.

>you just learn to accept that as i accept your views , i don't have
>to agree with them ,

As I accept your views that you don't need or want anything to
do with firearms.  Fine, I wouldn't dream of forcing you to.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: cash@convex.com (Peter Cash)
Subject: Re: No charges filed in SWAT killing
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 03:19:01 GMT
Organization: The Instrumentality
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.

In article <1992Aug11.021616.18748@microsoft.com> alane@microsoft.com (Alan Ezekiel) writes:
...
>To summarize the article: last March, the Snohomish County SWAT
>team got a tip for a suspect in an armored-car robbery/murder.
>They geared up and (in accordance with standard SWAT procedure)
>assaulted the house with overwhelming force.
...
>Net result?  Deputy Tony Aston shot and killed Robin Marie Pratt
>in full view of her 6-year-old daughter and 5-year-old niece,
>using his MP-5 submachine gun.  Pratt was totally blameless; she
>heard men breaking down the door and windows, ran from her bedroom
>to gather the children, and was shot to death without warning by
>by Deputy Aston, who was in the hallway.
...
>To my mind, this sort of incident can *only* be caused by reckless,
>negligent, or intentional action.  It's damn sure that weapon didn't
>fire by itself!

I agree that some kind of discipline is called for--the officer should at
least be fired. However, I think the problem goes further than this.
Incidents like this are becoming more and more common--there was one in
Texas a few weeks ago, where an 80-something year old bed-ridden
grandmother was shot during a "drug raid" that resulted from a bad tip
(apparently made by a resentful boyfriend of a girl that lived in the
house). What's to blame here is not so much the individual cop, as the
people who put him into that situation.

In the good old days, if the cops wanted you, they used to come knock on
the door--now they knock _down_ the door and shoot anything that moves.
Why? Well, partly I think it's the war on drugs--it's caused the level of
violence in all aspects of police work to escalate dramatically. Partly,
it's greedy prosecutors and police commanders who want to see their names
in the papers, and get a reputation for being "tough on crime" (not to
mention getting their pockets lined with the proceeds of summary property
seizures). Partly, it's the media, who hype the drug war and associated
phenomena for all it's worth.

This kind of fascist police behavior is only going to stop when the people
get tired of it. Tired enough to let their elected officials know that 
being "anti-crime" is not a ticket to being elected. Tired enough to let
the politicians know that they aren't buying the "war on drugs" bull puckey
anymore. 

-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
             |      Die Welt ist alles, was Zerfall ist.     |
Peter Cash   |       (apologies to Ludwig Wittgenstein)      |cash@convex.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Xref: sparky talk.politics.guns:19368 alt.flame:12129
From: lefty@apple.com (Lefty)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,alt.flame
Subject: Re: democratic platform
Date: 17 Aug 92 16:45:56 GMT
Organization: Our Lady of Heavy Artillery

In article <1992Aug14.234050.17419@cfctech.cfc.com>, kevin@cfctech.cfc.com
(Kevin Darcy) wrote:
> 
> In article <1992Aug13.220118.14275@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman) writes:
> >
> >ps - My use of last names is neither inappropriate nor hostile.
> 
> Your continued use of Mr. Ezekiel's last name, in the manner he himself has 
> characterized as "rude", is both inappropriate AND hostile.

You'd better take him at his word, Andy.

Kevin's without any doubt the expert on rude, inappropriate and hostile.

--
Lefty (lefty@apple.com)
C:.M:.C:., D:.O:.D:.
From: benjamin@rice-chex.ai.mit.edu (Benjamin Renaud)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: A question
Date: 22 Aug 92 20:13:32 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory

This is a question to people who know about the interpretation of "a
well-regulated militia" in the 2nd amendment.

What does it mean? I have seen people say that it was well trained and
organized neighborhood (like on a block) independent groups of
citizens. But, ifthe amendment is directed at these guys, i see an
incoherence: the goverment has to judge who is well trained and
organized in order to authorize the sale of weapons.

This doesn't seem to be a coehrent interpretation when one believes
that the 2nd amendment was written in order to avoid tyranny. But then
again, the 2nd amendment does not seem to legitimize total freedom in
the availability of weapons since it specifies explicitely certain
limits (a well regulated militia). 

Who knows how this is interpreted legally?
Thanks a lot,

Benjamin Renaud
benjamin@ai.mit.edu
From: sybok@athena.mit.edu (The Rifleman)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Clinton and Suicides, injuries, and Vigilantees.
Date: 15 Aug 92 02:14:27 GMT
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology

In article <1992Aug14.202216.22911@ttinews.tti.com> 
hollombe@polymath.tti.com (The Polymath) writes:
>
>(BTW, under California law, if anyone gets hold of one of your guns and
>injures or kills themselves or someone else, _you_ get to spend three
>years in jail for "improper storage of a firearm", a felony.  As I write,
>at least one person is in jail because his grandson accidentally shot
>himself on New Year's.  What effect, if any, this law will have on in-home
>gun accidents remains to be seen).

So if a burglar breaks into your home while you're at work, cracks
your safe, steals your guns, and blows away a few policemen, _you_
go to jail?  Ridiculous!  Sounds like a prime candidate for JURY
NULLIFICATION.  Which states have a FIJA?
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: sybok@athena.mit.edu (The Rifleman)
Subject: Re: UFO "October Surprise" and USA TAKEOVER?!
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 22:40:35 GMT

In article <OTTO.92Aug12155011@tukki.jyu.fi> otto@tukki.jyu.fi (Otto J. Makela) writes:
>In article <1992Aug6.192350.27305@clpd.kodak.com> fischer@li.serum.kodak.com (Chris Fischer (x39613)) writes:
>   In article <1992Aug6.143155.25460@mcshub.dcss.mcmaster.ca> bunker@physun.physics.mcmaster.ca (Alex Bunker) writes:
>   >In article <8B91oB1w165w@bluemoon.rn.com> garys@bluemoon.rn.com (Gary Stollman) writes:
>   [gun comments from Gary's clone]
>   >In waht way are Canadians Germans UKers and Frenchman less "free"
>   >than americans.
>
>   To start with, they are not free to carry guns.
>
>Nor are we free to drive down the freeway in the wrong direction.
>It's all the matter of what is percieved as too dangerous to be allowed.

That's a pretty _stupid_ analogy.  If I drive down the freeway on
the wrong side of the road, I place others in immediate and certain danger.
If I own or carry a gun on my person, I am harming NO ONE.  Furthermore,
one's right to self defense and defense against tyranny, as acknowledged
in the US Second Amendment, is much more fundamental than a whimsical "right"
to choose which side of a public freeway to drive down.
>
>I've never felt the need to carry a gun (even though I've been in some pretty
>tight spots), and I'm glad I live in a society where I don't have to.

I don't might you not carrying a gun, as long as you don't try to
use the government to stop ME from carrying my gun.  

  "The supposed  quietude  of  a  good  man  allures the ruffian;
   while on the other hand, arms like laws discourage and keep the
   invader and the plunderer  in  awe,  and  preserve order in the
   world as well as property.  The same balance would be preserved
   were all the world destitute of  arms,  for all would be alike;
   but  since some will not, others dare  not  lay  them  aside...
   Horrid  mischief would ensue were one half the  world  deprived
   the use of them..." (Thomas Paine, I writings of  Thomas  Paine
   at 56 (1894))

In addition to other attackers with illegal weapons, there'll
always be the possibility of someone stronger attacking you, or of an
attack by mulitple assailants.  I won't give my gun . . . ever.

>>The fact that yearly much more people in the United States get killed by
>guns than in Europe of course has nothing to do with gun control, right ?

It's a behavioral problem--it has _nothing_ to do with the presence
of firearms.  In the US, states with the highest availability of 
firearms have the lowest murder rates.  In Florida, "smash & grab"
crooks have taken to attacking rental cars because they fear the
armed Florida citizens.  (Florida residents can carry a concealed
handgun legally with a permit, but out of staters cannot.)



Xref: sparky talk.politics.guns:19730 talk.politics.animals:7296
From: rms@acsu.buffalo.edu (Robert M. Straubinger)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,talk.politics.animals
Subject: PETA and AIDS was Re: PETA Activities Suspected of Violating FCC Act, Says PPF
Date: 20 Aug 92 22:28:29 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: SUNY/Buffalo Pharmaceutics

In article <1992Aug20.032818.4917@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> unglenie@ford.ecn.purdue.edu (Robert J Unglenieks) writes:
>Robert M. Straubinger writes:
>>Robert J Unglenieks writes:
>>>
ru>>In a letter to the editor from Lisa Catapano, managing director, NAMES Project
  >>>Foundation came this reply to the ad:
>>>
rms>>     [deleted quote stating that the NAMES project is in no way
   >>      affiliated with "Americans for Medical Progress Educational Foundation"]
>>
RMS>>What is the position of 'the AR movement' on "experimentation on animals to
   >>find a cure for AIDS" ?

RU >There are many voices to the "movement", thus no one position.  The one I
  >take is to invest heavily in education so that transmission can be prevented.
  >IS there anything wrong with this approach too?

Prevention of AIDS is by far the best. However, prevention is meaningless for
those already infected.  A cure for AIDS is the only reprieve from this
death sentence. Likely a cure will only result from research. Likely this
research will have to use animals.

Can you (or anyone else) answer the question that was asked? Both
times this question was posed (the first time not by me) the answers
have not addressed the question.

Bob Straubinger, Pharmaceutics
SUNY/Buffalo                    "Above are my opinions, not those of SUNY"
From: kossack@owlnet.rice.edu (Jordan Marc Kossack)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: No charges filed in SWAT killing
Date: 14 Aug 1992 03:41:16 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: A Glorified, Overheated Swamp

In article <1992Aug13.133400.12312@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> aj336@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Pat Weber) writes:
|> criminals. They DIVIDE & CONQUER - how will your gun ownership
|> protect you?

	In such a situation, how will your left thumb help you? 
   Are you ready to cut it off?  Why or why not?  

-- 
 Jordan M Kossack  |  BARKLEY UNIX:  
 kossack@rice.edu  |                 The operating system with an attitude  
  +1 713 240 2073  |    
  
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns