HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
Date: 7 Jan 1993 21:45:27 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: rocket.sw.stratus.com

In article <9301051952.18@rmkhome.UUCP>, rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:

> A friend of mine got his sporting license 3 years ago.  He joined a gun
> club for less than $100 per year, got the three references, and was given
> a permit.  No hassle.

So you approve of policies that restrict gun ownership to the relatively
well-off.

> >>>My wife is stalled on her permit because all of the people she's known
> >>>for any length of time in the area are anti-gun.
> >>
> >>That's life.
> >
> >No, that's injustice, ethically bankrupt, and a direct and immediate 
> >violation of her Constitutionally protected civil liberties.
> 
> The government doesn't tell her how to pick her friends.

It's none of the government's business who your friends are.

> >>>> The police would like to know who has guns.
> >>>
> >>>Probably so; but since having a gun isn't a crime, it's frankly none
> >>>of their damn business.
> 
> Unless they are criminals or are on parole.

No, wrong.  The police would like to know if an ex-felon is BUYING
a gun, and that I will grant.  If they fail at that, they will never 
know if an ex-felon HAS a gun, because he has evaded their check.  

And though I am resigned to being checked at sale time to see if I am 
an ex-felon, I maintain that after I have passed that check, the police 
have no need to know that I HAVE a gun, because it's none of their
damn business.

Note that even the Brady Bill requires the police chief to destroy 
all records of purchase if the purchaser checks out clean.  Meanwhile,
a few anal-retentive states like Massachusetts still think they have 
to keep a pin-map of every firearm in the state.

> The local paper here reports arrests, which are a matter of public record.

All arrests?  Don't say yes, because it's provably false.  It serves
MY town too, but doesn't report all the arrests in my town.  No paper
does.

> In MAssachusetts, you are more likely to have someone break into your home,
> than have someone threaten to shoot you on the street.

Maybe if you sit in an air-conditioned computer lab all day.  If you
work in a shelter, or a tavern, or a welfare office, or on a road crew,
your mileage WILL vary.

> Perhaps I've been lucky, but I haven't been through experiences that would
> make me want to carry a gun at all times, except when I lived in Boston.

...which is about the hardest place in the state to get exactly that kind
of "permission."  Sorta makes "Massachusetts-sense," doesn't it?
-- 

cdt@rocket.sw.stratus.com   --If you believe that I speak for my company,
OR cdt@vos.stratus.com        write today for my special Investors' Packet...

Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
From: rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly)
Organization: The Man With Ten Cats
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 00:10:53 GMT
Reply-To: rmkhome!rmk@merk.com (Rick Kelly)

In article <C0Fyty.C2r@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> amirza@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Anmar Caves) writes:
>In article <9301051937.44@rmkhome.UUCP> rmkhome!rmk@merk.com (Rick Kelly) writes:

>>I wonder how this would be treated in the workplace.  I suspect that
>>companies would be able to ban guns from the premises.  So you leave
>>your gun out in your car for the crooks.
>>
>
>Your arguments are very disjointed.
>
>As far as workplaces are concerned, they have no need to know if I'm
>carrying or not.  If it's a big problem, and enough people are
>carrying I'm sure some type of secure storage could be arranged.  If
>not, then a responsible gun owner would have a good heavy steel lock
>box somewhere in the car bolted down and concealed.  In a parking lot,
>few crooks have the time or inclination to start dismantling a car,
>the few parking lot car thefts generally are of the break a window,
>rip out the stereo, and grab anything of value that is readily
>apparent.  Listen Rick, you can keep manufacturing all this you want.
>We can sit here and manufacture "what ifs" all day.

Well, I worked at one place where a worker, who had a valid license
to carry a gun for the protection of life and property, carried a
gun onto company property, in an ankle holster, against company policy.
He was fired after his third offense, and the state upheld it.

At the last company I worked for, they had cars stripped in the parking
lot.

Guns are stolen from honest, hardworking people every day.  Perhaps you
live in an area where this never happens.  I've seen it happen to friends
of mine.

-- 

Rick Kelly    rmkhome!rmk@merk.com    merk!rmkhome!rmk    rmk@frog.UUCP
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: amirza@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Anmar Caves)
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 14:11:06 GMT

In article <9301091910.55@rmkhome.UUCP> rmkhome!rmk@merk.com (Rick Kelly) writes:
>In article <C0Fyty.C2r@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> amirza@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Anmar Caves) writes:
>>In article <9301051937.44@rmkhome.UUCP> rmkhome!rmk@merk.com (Rick Kelly) writes:
>
>
>Well, I worked at one place where a worker, who had a valid license
>to carry a gun for the protection of life and property, carried a
>gun onto company property, in an ankle holster, against company policy.
>He was fired after his third offense, and the state upheld it.

If he felt that his right to self-defense was that important, then he
shouldn't work for a company that is so ready to try to restrict it.
BTW, he *failed* in keeping his gun concealed if they found him
carrying it *three* times.  Let's look at this rationally.  A business
*does* have a right to require that firearms, or anything they feel is
"bad" not be brought on their property.  On the other side, I have the
right to not work for that company, or patronize their stores.  That's
assuming they know you have it.  If they don't know you have it, then 
no harm done eh?

>At the last company I worked for, they had cars stripped in the parking
>lot.
>Guns are stolen from honest, hardworking people every day.  Perhaps you
>live in an area where this never happens.  I've seen it happen to friends
>of mine.

Cars are stolen as well.  Often times, stolen cars are used in
commission of crimes.  What is your point?  If you know you work in an
area where cars are stripped, you can act accordingly by not leaving
your firearm in your car.  The above concerning whether or not you
have to work in a place applies here too.
-- 
Anmar Mirza   # Chief of Tranquility  #My Opinions! NotIU's!#Purveyor of
EMT-D         # Base, Lawrence Co. IN # Legalize Explosives!#nontraditional
N9ISY (tech)  # Somewhere out on the  # Politicians prefer  #family values
Networks Tech.# Mirza Ranch.C'mon over# unarmed peasants.   #Space For Rent
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: ARCHER@utkvm1.utk.edu (T. Archer)
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
Organization: University of Tennessee 
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 19:31:46 GMT

In article <9301091950.12@rmkhome.UUCP> rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:
>Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
>Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
>Path: utkux1.utk.edu!cs.utk.edu!gatech!udel!wupost!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!psinntp!alliant!merk!rmkhome!rmk
>From: rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly)
>Organization: The Man With Ten Cats
>Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 00:50:05 GMT
>Reply-To: rmkhome!rmk@merk.com (Rick Kelly)
>Message-ID: <9301091950.12@rmkhome.UUCP>
>References: <pa142548.604.726244364@utkvm1.utk.edu> <9301051955.18@rmkhome.UUCP> <C0Fzrv.DC1@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>
>Lines: 25
>In article <C0Fzrv.DC1@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> amirza@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Anmar Caves) writes:
>>In article <9301051955.18@rmkhome.UUCP> rmkhome!rmk@merk.com (Rick Kelly) writes:
>>>In article <pa142548.604.726244364@utkvm1.utk.edu> pa142548@utkvm1.utk.edu (T. Archer) writes:
>>>>In article <9301021347.42@rmkhome.UUCP> rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:
>>>>>So, do you carry a gun 24 hours a day?
>>>>>
>>>>When I was a Georgia resident I did.  Here in Tennessee, private citizens 
>>>>can't get carry permits.
>>>
>>>When you were living in Georgia, how often did you have to pull a gun and/or
>>>shoot at somebody?
>>
>>What kind of question is this?  I've never had to pull my gun, much
>>the same as I've never had a claim on my automobile insurance, my
>>medical insurance, had someone break into my house, etc.  Since I
>>obviously don't need insurance, I shouldn't carry it right?  Is that
>>your point?  Since you didn't state one, we must assume. ^
>>							 |
>>Heavy, heavy sarcasm--------------------------------------
>
>Why did you decide to start carrying a gun?
>
Because I wanted to.  Why did you start wearing a seatbelt?
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Vote Dempublican, it's easier than thinking.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson)
Subject: Re: communists + anarchists in the NRA
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 08:20:17 GMT

csjohn@watson.mtsu.edu (J Wallace) writes:

>aforum@moose.uvm.edu (autonome forum) writes:

>>Just curious: how many other communists/anarchists are there in the
>>NRA besides us? Hopefully there are some other leftists in the group;
>>we can't let it get totally dominated by right-wing freaks!

>Is this a joke?
>Do you have a name, or are you just another cowardly crackpot?

	Finger provides nothing from my site.  Anybody else have any
information?  In any event, I noticed something interesting in his
posts.  Governments murdered people, guerilla's "executed" people.

	I guess it's just a matter of how much slant you wish to
put on your propaganda that decrees the rightness of your cause.

< Dan Sorenson, DoD #1066 z1dan@exnet.iastate.edu viking@iastate.edu >
<  ISU only censors what I read, not what I say.  Don't blame them.  >
<  "Are you *SURE* he's worth a Harley-Davidson?" -- my grandmother  >
< to my girlfriend, about me.  "I'd better not say" -- my girlfriend >
From: pes3@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Paul Eric Stoufflet)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Judges and Jury Nullification (was Re: Traveling with a gun)
Date: 12 Jan 93 16:02:51 GMT
Reply-To: pes3@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Paul Eric Stoufflet)
Organization: Columbia University

In article <1993Jan11.154634.21448@mtu.edu> pecampbe@mtu.edu (Paul Campbell) writes:

>Perhaps a better translation of Stare Dictus is "I can do whatever I want
>to because I am a Judge" or "Oh come on, you didn't think the Roman empire
>really fell?" I have personally witnessed judges getting put in their place.
>It's possible. That's why we have writs of prohibition, mandamous, habeus
>corpus, oaths of office, and especially JURIES with the power of nullification.
>For example, within the last several years, how many cases has the IRS been
>losing right and left despite having judges essentially in their back pocket?	

I recently had the pleasure of being called for Jury Duty in Connecticut,
where as part of the judge's talk before the Voir Dire he informed us that 
we were to make our decision solely on the basis of presented testimony
and evidence and his instructions, and not to "take the law into our own
hands".  His reason was that (1) an appeals process exists for any errors
made and (2) he was an expert in such matters, while we were not.

The first reason makes some sense (the second does not) but what occured
to me is: What is the status of laws that have been disregarded by
Jury Nullification?  They are still on the books, and I am not sure
that such cases can be cited as precedents.  Is it better to be right in
a lower court, or go for an appeal and get a favorable ruling in a
higher court.  If Griswold vs. CT (illegal for married couples to use
contraceptives) had been decided by jury nullification, would that
law still be enforced?

I wasn't picked for the jury.



  / \ / \     Paul Stoufflet                          / \ / \
 |  / \  |    Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center   |  / \  |
 |  \ /  |    internet: pes3@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu  |  \ /  |
  \_/_\_/     All opinions are my own                 \_/_\_/
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
Date: 7 Jan 93 17:40:20 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: rocket.sw.stratus.com

In article <9301061510.24@rmkhome.UUCP>, rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:
> In article <1idohvINNt9a@transfer.stratus.com> cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares) writes:
> >In article <9301042000.28@rmkhome.UUCP>, rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:
> >
> >> >Don't ask me.  Ask your newspaper.  And demand an answer.  And turn on
> >> >your bullshit alarm first.  Then come back and tell us.
> >
> >> The Framingham edition of the Middlesex News reports extensively on
> >> the comings and goings of the police.
> >
> >Not the Ludlow police.
> 
> No, the Framingham police.  They have different additions for different
> communities.

All right -- let me spell it out for the logically-challenged:

"You didn't read about this case in the Middlesex News police log because 
the Middlesex News doesn't serve the locality in which it occurred.  The
Middlesex News ain't got NO edition for that town.  As to why they didn't
report it as regular statewide news, perhaps they didn't know about it.
If they did know about it, you'll have to ask them why they chose not to
run the story."

Did you understand it that time?
-- 

cdt@rocket.sw.stratus.com   --If you believe that I speak for my company,
OR cdt@vos.stratus.com        write today for my special Investors' Packet...
From: fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (steve hix)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
Date: 6 Jan 1993 20:59:10 GMT
Organization: Sun
NNTP-Posting-Host: concertina

In article <9301051955.18@rmkhome.UUCP> rmkhome!rmk@merk.com (Rick Kelly) writes:
>In article <pa142548.604.726244364@utkvm1.utk.edu> pa142548@utkvm1.utk.edu (T. Archer) writes:
>>In article <9301021347.42@rmkhome.UUCP> rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:
>>>So, do you carry a gun 24 hours a day?
>>>
>>When I was a Georgia resident I did.  Here in Tennessee, private citizens 
>>can't get carry permits.
>
>When you were living in Georgia, how often did you have to pull a gun and/or
>shoot at somebody?

If none, then the deterrent worked!
















--
-------------------------------------------------------
| Some things are too important not to give away      |
| to everybody else and have none left for yourself.  |
|------------------------ Dieter the car salesman-----|
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: vtessier@vela.acs.oakland.edu (Vince Tessier)
Subject: Re: Firearms Coalition Report of Dec '92
Keywords: NRA,Knox
Organization: Oakland University, Rochester MI.
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 03:25:15 GMT

cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares) writes:

>In article <1993Jan7.182534.8582@cbnewsc.cb.att.com>, rats@cbnewsc.cb.att.com (Morris the Cat) writes:

>> The plan defines "dangerously available" or "immediate access" as 
>> "the ability to retrieve a loaded firearm within 10 minutes."

>This is completely moronic.  I could retrieve a loaded firearm from a 
>SECURE VAULT within 10 minutes.

Sure you can.  About the only place you can't get to in 10 minutes is
a bank vault with a time lock.  This isn't moronic, it's frightening.

"They're coming to take 'em away ..."

-- 
Vince Tessier (vtessier@vela.acs.oakland.edu)
"It takes a compassionate man to covet a three-legged dog, and
 it takes a sorry son of a gun to name that dog Flat Tire."
	-- Gamble Rogers (Requiescat In Pace)
From: cash@convex.com (Peter Cash)
Subject: Re: TIME is on the ropes, asks for forgive
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 06:26:05 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 <C0q084.A9r@matilda.vut.edu.au> db@matilda.vut.edu.au (David Bowman ) writes:
>In article <1907@esl.ESL.COM> drm@esl.com writes:

>>I noticed that a recent (post-New Year's) issue of Time had an editorial  
>>cartoon in which the "Somalian Rifle Associaiton" asserted their rights to  
>>deep and bear rocket launchers in the face of Marines bent on confiscating  
>>arms used in thuggery.

>Time makes a good point! 

And what point is that? The only point I can see in this cartoon (and in
much of the journalism that's come out of Somalia) is that journalists see
whatever foreign culture they happen to be visiting through the filter
of their own experiences and prejudices--not to mention the prejudices of
their editors back home.

How else do you think Mogadishu suddenly happened to acquire a "Green Line"
that divided portions of the city occuppied by conflicting tribal militias?
It's comforting to the journalists to think that Mogadishu is just like
that homey place where they last covered a civil war--Beirut. 

Similarly, coming up with a culturally informed analysis of what's going on
in Somalia might take some serious research and thought. But research and
thought are so unnecessary--what could be more obvious than that the
violence in Somalia has the same cause as the violence in the urban US? Why
of course--it's _guns_! The problem with Somalia is that there are too many
guns! And the solution is gun control! What could be plainer?

Just as journalists don't want to look into the real causes and possible
solution of domestic violence (e.g., how about drug legalization?), they
don't want to bother to look into the reasons the Somalis have for fighting
each other. (For example, does the Somali state make political and cultural
sense from the Somali viewpoint?)

>I thought you lot would support
>the right of the Somalis to keep and bear arms. 

Well, yes--if I were a Somali, I'd definitely want to hang on to my guns.

>" And so they took Ned Kelly and hanged him in the jail,
>  For he fought singlehanded although in iron mail.
>  And no man singlehanded can hope to break the bars;
>  It's a thousand like Ned Kelly who'll hoist the flag of stars"

Hmmm--you're not talking of armed revolution here, are you? 8^)

-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
             |      Die Welt ist alles, was Zerfall ist.     |
Peter Cash   |       (apologies to Ludwig Wittgenstein)      |cash@convex.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
From: rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly)
Organization: The Man With Ten Cats
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 01:03:07 GMT
Reply-To: rmkhome!rmk@merk.com (Rick Kelly)

In article <C0G0Br.E4v@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> amirza@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Anmar Caves) writes:
>In article <9301051928.44@rmkhome.UUCP> rmkhome!rmk@merk.com (Rick Kelly) writes:
>>>Why? There is no way to prevent someone who is not "psycologically able" 
>>>from getting a handgun.  All you can do is place a political tool at the
>>>hands of people who think that no one should own a handgun.
>>
>>And what about people with felony records?
>
>What about them?  You failed to even come up with something coherent
>here.  You asked a question, that cannot be answered because we can't
>read your mind as to the subject of your question,

I'm just questioning your all or nothing attitude.  You are saying that
all people, all of the time, should have equal access to guns.  And
when the smoke clears we'll see who wins.

-- 

Rick Kelly    rmkhome!rmk@merk.com    merk!rmkhome!rmk    rmk@frog.UUCP
From: ARCHER@utkvm1.utk.edu (T. Archer)
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
Organization: University of Tennessee 
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 16:03:02 GMT

In article <1ii89nINNn9d@transfer.stratus.com> cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares) writes:
>> The local paper here reports arrests, which are a matter of public record.
>
>All arrests?  Don't say yes, because it's provably false.  It serves
>MY town too, but doesn't report all the arrests in my town.  No paper
>does.

Actually, arrests should be irrelivant.  ANYONE can be arrested.  CONVITIONS 
are what matters.  Hell, I don't think that an arrest record should even be 
maintained.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Vote Dempublican, it's easier than thinking.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: chrisb@natinst.com (Chris Bartz)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Time-Warner
Date: 8 Jan 1993 11:59:10 -0600
Organization: National Instruments, Austin, TX
NNTP-Posting-Host: eagle.natinst.com

In article <24753@galaxy.ucr.edu> starbuck@galaxy.ucr.edu (starbuck) writes:
>Just a quick question about Time-Warner.  Was it Time-Warner that promoted
>and defended Ice Tea's Cop Killer song?  


Yes.


-- 
-chris bartz (chrisb@natinst.com)
From: jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Saved by the gun, part II
Date: 6 Jan 93 18:22:20 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.

"Saved by the Gun Part II" or "Mama, they ain't no one shot stops"

"Hardcopy" continued its "caught on video" series tonight.  The scene
this time was a bank.  Unfortunately the tape was time lapse so the
motion was jerky.  Perp starts to rob the bank with a revolver.
Off-duty copy grabs his backup auto (looked like a small 9mm,
may have been a .380) and dove to the floor while firing one shot
into the perp's chest.  He later explained that he perceived the perp
making a move to shoot at a teller.  His gun jammed after the first
shot.  Perp starts firing at near point-blank range while the cop
rolls around on the floor.  He is not hit.  For maybe 15 or 20 seconds
the cop and the perp wrestle for the gun.  The cop gets it away and
the perp runs.  Halfway across the parking lot, the perp drops dead
from the bullet in his heart - the one the cop fired a minute or so 
ago.

This sequence was about as graphic a demonstration as possible that
there really ain't no reliable one stop shot.  Of course, if the
cop's holeshooter had been equipped to make those half inch holes,
the outcome might have been a bit quicker. :-)

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
From: jkapson@ad-29.Naitc.Com (John Kapson)
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
Organization: AC Nielsen Co., Bannockburn IL
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 93 15:07:57 GMT

In article <9301052017.35@rmkhome.UUCP> rmkhome!rmk@merk.com (Rick Kelly) writes:
[snip]
>There is a guy on trial right now, Kenneth Seguin, who comes from the
>next town.  He strangled his kids, and chopped up his wife with an
>axe.  He was a "seemingly" mild mannered vice president at a local
>high tech firm.

So he managed this without using a gun?  Think about it...


+-----------------------+-------------------------------------------------+
|      John Kapson      | "Americans have a right and advantage of being  |
| NRA               ILA | armed -- unlike the citizens of other countries |
| jkapson@nis.naitc.com | whose governments are afraid to trust the       |
|                       | people with arms."      - James Madison,        |
|                       | The Federalist Papers No. 46 at 243-244.        |
+-----------------------+-------------------------------------------------+
|                  PGP Public Key available via email                     |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns