HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: donb@igor.tamri.com (Don Baldwin)
Subject: Gun Laws in various States
Organization: TOSHIBA America MRI, South San Francisco, CA
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 20:24:26 GMT

Hi folks,

There are a few areas that I'm considering relocating to and I
wanted to ask people who live there what their gun laws are like.

1) Iowa - Dan tells me that Iowa is friendly to gun owners; I'll
          pick up a detailed list of its laws when I visit there (no,
          I won't forget the Sierra Nevada Pale Ale, Dan).

2) Colorado - My impression is that, aside from CCW laws, Colorado
              is also pretty friendly to gun owners.  Comments?

3) Wisconsin - No idea whatsoever.

4) Minnesota - Ditto.

My selection criteria:  gun laws equal to or better than California's.
No permit or registration; non-discretionary CCW a plus.  Political
climate middle of the road, not extremely Left or Right-wing.  As we
intend to spawn off a kid or two, the strength of the area's
educational system is a big factor.  Substantial technical
development would be nice, as I don't want to move someplace nice
and be unemployable.  :)

So far, Iowa is high on our list, except that I'm concerned about the
job market there.  As we prefer to avoid high temperatures, especially
in combination with high humidity, the South (except for North Carolina)
is probably out.  We also consider the Northeast to be out of the
question (we like the RKBA philosophy of Vermont/Maine but are worried
about the job market there as well).

Recommendations?

Thanks,

   don
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: American Federation of Teachers on School Violence
Date: 26 Aug 92 19:08:53 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Aug25.160034.19489@bluemoon.rn.com>, grant@bluemoon.rn.com (Grant DeLorean) writes:
>  In case you don't know, NCBH is the "National Coalition to Ban Hnadguns"
> which has since changed its name...

Twice, I believe.  They first changed to the "National Coalition (or Center?) 
Against Handgun Violence."  I recently got a mailing from them, and they
have now apparently changed "Handgun" to "Gun."
-- 

cdt@pdp.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
From: dadams@cray.com (David Adams)
Subject: Re: CLINTON NEW TEXT: GUN CONTROL
Reply-To: dadams@cray.com
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Date: 27 Aug 92 13:54:25 CDT

In article H2J@acsu.buffalo.edu, blayda@acsu.buffalo.edu (Danger) writes:
|In article <viking.714451326@vincent1.iastate.edu> viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson) writes:
|>
|>	If this is true, I may just vote for Bush.  Why?  I planned
|>on voting Libertarian, but if this extreme is what the Clinton/Gore
|>ticket can assure me, perhaps I'm better off voting so they lose
|>rather than so all of them get the message?  There's always '96 for
|>voting Libertarian, but by then what else will I have lost if my
|>vote didn't help defeat what we all saw?
|
|In all seriousness, will Bush be any better than Clinton when it
|comes to gun control?  Bush hasn't exactly attacked Clinton on
|his stance.  I believe, if elected, Bush will adopt Clinton's
|stance at least in part and possibly in its entirety.
|

Hasn't Bush at least opposed the Brady bill?  And this inspite
of Regan's turnaround.  At least he has some track record.
That has to be better than Clinton.  We know what he has prommised!

---
--David C. Adams  Statistician  Cray Research Inc.  dadams@cray.com
___________________________________________________________________
       member--Minnesotans for Global Warming.

Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: alane@microsoft.com (Alan Ezekiel)
Subject: Re: ICLU Commission on the 2nd Amendment and Gun Control
Date: 03 Sep 92 21:28:57 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

rwojcik@atc.boeing.com (Rick Wojcik) writes:
>                          The fact that they [the Supreme Court] choose not
>to rule on Constitutional challenges to local gun control laws suggests to me
>that such challenges lack merit in their eyes.

When the Supreme Court declines to hear a case, it does so without
prejudice to either side.  While they may indeed choose not to hear
cases which they consider to be without merit, there are many other
reasons why they might decline to hear any specific case, not the
least of which is simple lack of space on the Court's docket.  It is
thus incorrect to assume that any case which the Supreme Court declines
to hear must be without merit.

                               -- Alane --
   /-----------------------------------------------------------------\
  /   NOBODY shares my opinions,    |    "I am a jelly doughnut"      \
 /    especially not my employer    |    -- President John F Kennedy   \
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------\
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: meyers@leonardo.rtp.dg.com (Bill Meyers)
Subject: Re: ICLU Commission on the 2nd Amendment and Gun Control
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 92 19:00:37 GMT
Organization: N/I

In article <1992Aug28.005816.19621@news.cs.indiana.edu> hagerp@moose.cs.indiana.edu (Paul Hager) writes:
>As promised, this is my first in what I hope will be a series
>of progress reports on our Indiana Civil Liberties Union (the
[ ... ]
>o      if the commission concludes that outright gun bans and the
>       like ARE unconstitutional, it might conclude that on public
>       policy grounds, the 2nd should be amended or repealed;
>
>o	the commission might conclude that, even though large numbers
>	of Americans are killed by firearms each year, as a practical

1989 total:     2,155,000 (all causes, NCHS estimate)
firearms:          33,000 (all -- accident, suicide, police, crime, etc.)
heart disease:    734,000 (NCHS estimate)

If "public policy" is a valid consideration, how about saturated fats?
--------
The 2nd Amendment is about sovereignty, not duck hunting.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: dlb@fanny.wash.inmet.com (David Barton)
Subject: Re: ICLU Commission on the 2nd Amendment and Gun Control
Organization: Intermetrics Inc., Washington Division, USA
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 15:43:07 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.005816.19621@news.cs.indiana.edu>
hagerp@moose.cs.indiana.edu (Paul Hager) writes:

   o	the commission might conclude that, even though large numbers
	   of Americans are killed by firearms each year, as a practical
	   matter this social cost is offset by personal freedom and
	   individual rights that are bound up in citizens constituting
	   a militia-in-being.  This is somewhat analogous to the role
	   of the automobile in affording citizens the power to freely
	   travel (a recognized right) despite the fact that its use 
	   kills 50K+ people every year.

   From private discussions I've had, I know that some ICLU members may
   not look favorably on any outcome that restricts the power of the
   state to control firearms.  However, I believe that most members are
   open-minded and will be receptive to good data and good reasoning and
   will consider a result that may go against their preconceptions.

Reasoning that includes such a presupposition as that found in your
fourth point is not "good data and good reasoning" on the face of
things.  It betrays your prejudice and the bias that you will bring to
your discussions.

Given that there is an estimated 1,000,000 crimes averted with
firearms every year, and an estimated 650,000 crimes averted with
handguns alone, the "social cost" mentioned above is problematic at
best.  If you hope to show "good data and good reasoning", I hope that
you will document any such "social cost" rather than assuming it.

					Dave Barton
					dlb@hudson.wash.inmet.com
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: lund@noao.edu (Rich Lund)
Subject: Re: hurricane aftermath
Summary: Citizenry needs to be armed
Keywords: gun control, criminal
Organization: National Optical Astronomy Observatories, Tucson, AZ, USA
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 20:01:11 GMT

In article <FF98C16F4E1F600D0C@VXC.UNCWIL.EDU> PATE@VXC.UNCWIL.EDU (BILL PATE, ADMIN. SERVICES, PATE@VXC.UNCWIL.EDU) writes:
>NBC had an interesting program last night called DATELINE. They interviewed
>several people in the Miami area in their wrecked neighborhoods, including
>one of their local correspondants. Some interesting shots of homeowners
>patroling with firearms in the absence of any law enforcement. One was of
>an 8 year old girl sitting in front of a pile of rubble with what I think
>was a Street Sweeper, identified by the reporter as a shotgun. Looked like 
>a repeat of the LA police abandoment of their citizens. I was wondering
>what the next round of anti-gun debates will sound like. A lot of citizens,
>formerly somewhat neutral, will likely take a stronger stance next time.
>

 
An interesting program wasn't it.  Imagine how shocked the gun control
advocates will be to see that normal citizens are capable of arming 
themselves in an emergency situation and not getting all trigger happy
and shooting indiscriminately at everything that moves.  This is what 
the RKBA is all about folks.  The public has the right to protect 
their lives and property and those scumbags who would take advantage 
of the tragedy inflicted on these organized and armed neighborhoods
no doubt left the area for easier pickin's.(Probably some liberal
neighborhood where people are more concerned for criminals rights
than their own)

***************
Rich Lund
lund@noao.edu
***************
Opinions expressed are my own etc. etc.
***************************************              
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: hays@ssd.intel.com (Kirk Hays)
Subject: Re: Gun control (was Re: democratic platform)
Organization: Intel Supercomputer Systems Division
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 15:41:58 GMT

In article <1992Aug27.212716.17225@microsoft.com>, alane@microsoft.com (Alan Ezekiel) writes:
|> PA142548@utkvm1.utk.edu (T. Archer) writes:
|> >lambert@spectrum.cs.unsw.oz.au (Tim Lambert) writes:
|> >>Terminator/Rifleman who in the past has called me stupid, a communist,
|> >>and a hoplophobe.  
|> >       ^^^^^^^^^^  Was 'dat?
|> 
|> "Hoplophobe" is a term coined by Jeff Cooper; it describes a person
|> who has an unreasoning fear of tools or instruments.

Actually, Jeff Cooper's "coining" of the term is approximately 60 years after
the first known citation.  Jeff hasn't claimed to have originated the term, in
any of his writings that I've seen.

I collect dictionaries and encyclopedias, and one of my dictionaries (I can't
recall offhand which one) showed an earliest citation of 1926, when I looked, in
curiousity, one or two years ago.

"Hoplophobe" is used in current psychiatric literature.

-- 
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.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.guns:20155 talk.politics.animals:7432
From: achenbac@epcot.spdc.ti.com (Jeff Achenbach)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,talk.politics.animals
Subject: Re: PETA Activities Suspected of Violating FCC Act, Says PPF
Date: 26 Aug 92 14:14:29 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: TI Semiconductor Process and Design Center

>>  Are you trying to tell me
>>the budgets for EPA, Interior, and Agriculture are primarily
>>funded by hunting license fees?
>
>I really don't think this is what Charles meant to imply -- at least
>that the funding is licensing specific, since obviously it's not.  Are
>you aware that over 80% of the DOI's funding comes from an 11% excise
>tax on guns, ammo, bows, etc. and the sale of Duck Stamps?  Are you
>aware that all funds given to the state environment funds (e.g., the
>Conservation Fund here in NY) from the DOI come from only these two
>areas and not from the general taxes?  Are you aware that the EPA also
>gets funds from that excise tax on our equipment (although I have no
>idea of the percentages)?  Sorry, I don't know all that much about the
>Dept. of Agriculture funding.  How much do they do for the environment
>vs. the DOI?
>

And guess who successfully lobbied for this excise tax? Outdoorsmen! Yes,
hunters and fishermen asked for a tax to benefit their sport. I'm sure the
ARs will belittle this by pointing to selfish motives, but the fact remains
noone has worked as hard to preserve and protect the environment as those 
who spend their time in the outdoors, mostly hunters and fishermen.

Jeff Achenbach
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
From: theune@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu (Peter Theune)
Subject: Re: hurricane aftermath
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 92 12:09:42 GMT

PATE@VXC.UNCWIL.EDU (BILL PATE, ADMIN. SERVICES, PATE@VXC.UNCWIL.EDU) writes:

>NBC had an interesting program last night called DATELINE. They interviewed
>several people in the Miami area in their wrecked neighborhoods, including
>one of their local correspondants. Some interesting shots of homeowners
>patroling with firearms in the absence of any law enforcement. One was of
>an 8 year old girl sitting in front of a pile of rubble with what I think
>was a Street Sweeper, identified by the reporter as a shotgun. Looked like 
>a repeat of the LA police abandoment of their citizens. I was wondering
>what the next round of anti-gun debates will sound like. A lot of citizens,
>formerly somewhat neutral, will likely take a stronger stance next time.


I was in the area Saturday and Sunday past. (29,30 August). I noticed
several things:

a.	Almost ALL of the police forces from Orlando south were engaged
in convoy escort. There was _NO_ evidence of speed enforcement, or
traffic control at all.

b.	In the neighborhood I was in, the neighbors had already
organized an armed neighborhood watch.  Mostly shotguns, plus holstered
pistols.  These people were polite, but insistant. You had to have a
verifyable reason to be in the area, or you were firmly, but politely
escorted out of the neighborhood.

c.	There was no sucessful looting in this neighborhood of middle
and upper middle class homes.

d.	Metro Dade police patroled the area after the 7 pm curfew, but
always stopped by the houses they knew were occupied at least once
during the day, just to check. They seemed to approve/appreciate the
neighborhood watch.  They gave the advice, "Be careful, be sure" . I was
not questioned by anyone as long a I was with my friend whose house I
was helping to close up/ salvage. After the first day, those still in
the neighborhood knew my face.

e.	There are _MANY_ heros, and a few scumbags in the Homestead
area. The heros will be eventually recognized, the scumbags will leave
the gene pool shortly.

Peter Theune

 

Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson)
Subject: Re: Hurricane Andrew
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 04:44:34 GMT

erudnick@pica.army.mil (FSAC-SID) writes:

>After the city of Homestead was damaged, moderate numbers of looters came
>from Miami. These were repelled by the local citizenry using their
>personal arms. The looters then returned in much larger numbers, with
>true military equipment (full auto weapons, sniper rifles, night vision),
>and shot anybody who resisted.

>Of course, no mention in our "free" press. Anybody hear something like
>this?

	I strongly doubt this is true.  First, the press has been hounding
Bush to get troops down there, despite the governor not submitting a formal
request.  Without that request, Bush cannot send troops (doesn't Article IV,
section iv, apply here?  It's somewhere in the separation of powers between
the feds and the states, perhaps in the US code?).  This type of incident
would give them very hot fuel for their editorials.  Second, any use of
automatic weapons would be trumpeted loudly, especially with the Brady
Bill rally's being held.  Third, this provides another general anti-gun
thing to display on the nightly news.  NBC would be slobbering in their
desire for such footage.

	Sounds like a rumor to me.

<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. >
From: bressler@iftccu.boeing.com (Rick Bressler)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Political Assasinations (Was: No charges filed in SWAT killing)
Date: 26 Aug 92 14:37:43 GMT
Organization: Boeing Commercial Airplane Group

/ iftccu:talk.politics.guns / cescript@mtu.edu (Charles Scripter) / 12:52 pm  Aug 25, 1992 /
>In article <4400229@iftccu.boeing.com>, bressler@iftccu.boeing.com
>(Rick Bressler) writes:
>
>> / iftccu:talk.politics.guns / jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond) /  2:53 pm
>>  Aug 20, 1992 /
>> cescript@mtu.edu (Charles Scripter) writes:
>
>One could be confused as to the author of the following.  I didn't write
>any of this. (I think Rick was responding to John's response to my post).
>
>> >Of course, this requires real police work, not the gun-happy, cowboy,
>> >kill-'em-all,let-God-sort-'em-out mentality rampant today.  If you think
>> >I'm kidding, find a way to sit in a ready room sometime and listen
>> >to these goons talk about getting horny during and after a raid.

Sorry, I didn't write any of this either....

Rick.
From: hes@unity.ncsu.edu (Henry E. Schaffer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Premeditated Murder - Part 2 (was Re: No charges filed in SWAT killing
Date: 30 Aug 92 16:56:51 GMT
Organization: NCSU Computing Center - Adams' Family Club

In article <viking.715157593@vincent2.iastate.edu> viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson) writes:
> ...  what's the cyclic rate of the MP5 versus the M3?   ...

  The M3 is listed with a cyclic rate of 350-450 rpm and the
MP5 (HK54) at 600 rpm.

  From Ezell's Small Arms of the World.

--henry schaffer  n c state univ
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: grant@bluemoon.rn.com (Grant DeLorean)
Subject: Re: CLINTON NEW TEXT: GUN CONTROL
Organization: Blue Moon
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 16:04:09 GMT

fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (steve hix) writes:

>In article <1992Aug22.171342.4861@bluemoon.rn.com> grant@bluemoon.rn.com (Grant DeLorean) writes:
>>donb@igor.tamri.com (Don Baldwin) writes:
>>
>>>Did Hillary Clinton REALLY say something to the effect that "the children
>>>belong to the State"?
>>
>> If the parents were married in the State of Ohio with a marriage license
>>the children DO belong to the state and the parents are merely caretakers
>>for the State. The State can do anything it chooses to the children,
>>including take them away at any time.

>Gack!

>Reference?

 The reference is easy, it is the application for the license that
states who owns the children. I remember it quite clearly (and it is
one of the reasons my wife and I will NOT be having children). By
signed the application for the license you are agreeing to the contract
with the state.
-- 
\   Grant DeLorean  - IHMSA & NRA Life Member -  (grant@bluemoon.rn.com)   /

        Tested on dolphins and assorted helpless furry creatures
From: fcrary@ocf.berkeley.edu (Frank Crary)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Strong reason to vote for Bush  (was: Atlanta Journal and Constitution: an e)
Date: 1 Sep 1992 02:34:15 GMT
Organization: U. C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility
NNTP-Posting-Host: lightning.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Aug31.132412.28095@hemlock.cray.com> dadams@cray.com writes:
>The best reason I can think of for voting for Bush (inspite his 
>broken prommises) is that he has consistently sought for and nominated
>Supreme Court Justices which would interpret the Constitution according
>to the philosophy of Judicial Restraint, and not try to rewrite it in
>order to push some social agenda.

I'm not too enthusastic about judicial restraint: This philosophy also
holds that the Court shouldn't interfere with Congress' interpertation
of the Constitution. However, there aren't too many other choices:

The last Justice to support an unconditional, absolute application
of the Constitution (e.g. thowing out all laws that violate the
text of the Constitution or it's intended meaning as best the Court
can determin it) left the Court in 1971 (Hugo Black). 

                                                 Frank Crary
						 CU Boulder

(By the way, does anyone know how to get usenet acces from Boulder? My
new account doesn't seem to have direct access and remote logins to my
old Berkeley account are getting to be a pain...)

Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: vojak@icebucket.stortek.com (Bill Vojak)
Subject: Ruger Ad in A. Rifleman
Originator: vojak@icebucket.stortek.com
Organization: Storage Technology Corp.
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 14:14:22 GMT

pat@rwing.UUCP (Pat Myrto) writes:

>Unfortunately, inside the front cover of this months _American Rifleman_
>there is an ad from Ruger touting their Ruger Express turn-bolt rifle,
>a 'nice' gun that someday will become a dreaded sniper rifle (or perhaps
>it groups so loosly it will never make the definition).

>`If you want the best, you owe yourself a Ruger Express'


 I saw this ad.  One part of it says "You deserve a rifle built without
 compromise" or some similar statement.  I think I'm going to rip that
 ad out, and mail it back to Bill Ruger with a letter saying: I already
 own several guns built without compromise. Their built by Marlin, SIG,
 Taurus, S&W.  None of these company compromise our RKBA, unlike Bill
 Ruger who enjoys kissing Sarah Brady's butt.

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

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

Xref: sparky talk.politics.guns:20122 talk.politics.animals:7416