HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: syuen@sierra.com (Shan Yuen)
Subject: Seek mechanic recommendation (East Side)
Organization: Sierra Geophysics Inc.,  Kirkland, Wa
Distribution: seattle
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 22:40:20 GMT

	Can anyone out there recommend a good car mechanic in the East
        side (Kirkland, Bellevue or Renton) that specialized in repairing
	Ford's car?  My 1985 Ford Escort needs valves adjustment.

Thanks in advance!

===============================================================================
Shan Yuen ----------------------__   /-\ <\_\"\_____   *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *
Sierra Geophysics, Inc. -------/ \  /   \ \_________>--  *  *  *  *  *  *  *
Kirkland, WA 98033 -----------/   \/     \   </          Flying to new height
syuen@sierra.com ------------/_____\,,,,,,\.___________________________________
===============================================================================
Xref: sparky seattle.general:4128 pnw.general:2943 alt.society.civil-liberty:6939
From: wlarkin@hounix.org (Ward Larkin)
Subject: Re: Freedom, Social Responsibility, Individual Responsibility
Organization: Houston UNIX Users Group (HOUNIX), Houston, TX
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 21:21:52 GMT

>>
>>What you don't seem to know is that "pursuit of happiness"
>>is part of the Declaration of Independence, and thereore
>>has absolutely no legal basis nor bearing.
>>
>>The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States
>>of America has a somewhat similar phrase ( that is, the
>>life, liberty and pursuit of happiness phrase ) but's it's
>>intent is to protect the people from oppressive government,
>>not to assure the people the freedom to do whatever they
>>wish.
>
>Er, um, yeah.
>
>People are being told by the government that they have to wear a helmet
>when they ride, despite the fact that there is no way their helmetless
>state could cause physical harm to another person.  In that case, there's
>no reason for the government to get involved and it IS acting in an
>oppressive way...
>
But there is a way their helmetless state can cause harm
to other people, and you mentioned that in your original
post.  That is, to bear the cost -- both financial and
ethical -- of the preventable harm done by someone to
themselves.

If a bridge is dangerous, should the government's only
responsibility be to post a sign which says that the
bridge is dangerous?  According to you, the government
shouldn't be allowed to deny those people who want to
cross dangerous bridges that "liberty".  After all the
associated physical harm will only be to themselves.

If you are really concerned about oppressive government,
then I encourage you to study the various RICO laws and
some of the various times these laws have been enacted.

You might think that these helmit laws are misguided
forms of paternalism, but the RICO laws are the
personification and embodiment of George Orwell's BIG
BROTHER.



-- 
-- Ward Larkin
   wlarkin@hounix.org
From: zombie@voodoo.UUCP (Mike York)
Newsgroups: seattle.general
Subject: Yet another request for contractor recommendations
Keywords: Broken tile wet rot no shower yuck
Date: 11 Dec 92 16:56:27 GMT
Distribution: seattle
Organization: BoGART To You Buddy, Bellevue, WA

Part of our shower wall came crashing down this morning (hmmm,  crashing
is a bit melodramatic, flopping down is a more appropriate description).
It looks like the necessary repairs may be out of my league, since it's an
outside wall with some wet rot involved, so we're looking for any 
recommendations for honest, reliable and reasonable contractors.  We're
located in West Seattle.


My apologies for putting a non-political, non-controversial (hopefully)
posting on seattle.general.  ;^)
-- 
    Mike York                        (206) 865-6577              
    Boeing Computer Services         zombie@voodoo.ca.boeing.com
From: dsjohns@uswnvg.com (Dwight Johns)
Newsgroups: seattle.general
Subject: Re: condoms in public schools
Date: 16 Dec 92 02:15:03 GMT
Distribution: seattle
Organization: U S WEST NewVector Group, Inc.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

It's been said before and it's still true... In today's world, kids are having
sex! Preace abstinance, tell them to just say "NO!" it may make a dent, but
quite simply isn't the answer to the problem of pregnant teens and disease
running rampant. Give them all condoms... Well that's not the answer either,
but at least it does take a more realistic look at the world that we all live
in. What we need is more education, more open communication between everyone
involved, and less people going out and having sex (i.e. horizontal tango)
with whoever's handy right now.

One last thing... I Will respond to any and all e-mail on this matter.
--
 Dwight Snake Doward Johns    |    :)   Little smiley face guys here only   (:
    dsjohns@uswnvg.com        |    because  the  woman  I  adore  likes  them.
 71332.743@CompuServe.com     |    -------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: seattle.general
From: prang@plato.ds.boeing.com (Ron Wanttaja)
Subject: Re: Displaying a weapon (was Bicycles are Vehicles)
Organization: Boeing Defense & Space Group
Distribution: seattle
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 19:33:13 GMT

In article <4126@phred.UUCP> harryb@phred.UUCP writes:
>In article 11930@eskimo.com, timf@eskimo.com (Timothy R. Flanagan) writes:
>>I never displayed a weapon.  That is against the law.
>
>There are many scenarios in which it is NOT against the law to display
>a weapon.

When I lived in Colorado, there was a precedent-setting case there.  I
forget how the situation started (whether the guy was verbally or
physically threatened, or just did it for the hell of it), but the police
arrested a man for displaying a weapon in public.

The judge found for the defendant... he had a concealed weapons permit.
The judge ruled that the permit gave him the right to display the gun when
he felt it was necessary.

                                          Ron Wanttaja
					  prang@plato.ds.boeing.com
Newsgroups: seattle.general
From: klg@statsci.com (Kevin L. Gross)
Subject: Re: Freedom, Social Responsibility, Individual Responsibility
Keywords: Helmet Laws, Drug Laws, etc.
Reply-To: klg@statsci.com (Kevin L. Gross)
Organization: Statistical Sciences, Inc
Distribution: seattle
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 18:03:57 GMT

eris@tc.fluke.COM (Chris Beckmeyer) writes:

   well put, kevin!  i agree with you but would like to ask a question...
   does washington state provide search/rescue services free to the "victim"?
   the state of nevada (or at least the particular county i lived in) did NOT.
   i recall an incident where three or four days of helicopter searching for
   a child lost in the desert resulted in a bill to the parents of somewhere
   between 40 and 50 thousand dollars. 'course the community jumped in with a
   zillion donations/fund raisers to cover it.
   
   just wondering....
   
   chris
   
I don't know, I presume they try and get the rescued person to pay if they
can. Most people cannot nor should a child be expected to unless his
parents can be proven to be negligent. I don't mind going with a system of
billing the user for the monies spent on such an issue. But then, I expect
the income tax to be repealed and all monies for *ANY* Government spending
to be paid for by the user.

In other words, if its to be a taxable income society, then no bitching
about the expense by government. If its to be a true Libertarian system of
pay as you go, fine. But not both. That's what they are passing off to us
now. I think the entitlements issue is also a governmental red herring
since the need to spend $16,000,000 on *ONE* fighter aircraft is
absolutely not necessary.

I'll pay for what NEEDS to be paid for and if people in that Libertarian
system want to get together and form collectives or buy insurance from
private Insurance Companies in order to share the cost, then they still
don't have a bitch just because one or more of the people in the collective
or the Insurance Companies customers gets a huge bill for something like
personal injury or rescue etc.

Again, the whole issue comes down to the profits of the Insurance
Companies, not the actual out-of-pocket expense to customers.

-Kevin
-- 
-Kevin L. Gross          klg@statsci.com           Disclaim THIS: 
 This message is protected under the 1st Amendment to the Constitution
 of the United States of America. I'm protected under the 4th, 5th, 9th
 and 14th Amendments among others, or at least I used to be.
Newsgroups: seattle.general,pnw.general,alt.society.civil-liberty,misc.talk.politics,alt.activism,alt.individualism,rec.bicycles,talk.politics.misc
From: deltaur@stein.u.washington.edu (deltaur)
Subject: Re: Freedom, Social Responsibility, Individual Responsibility
Keywords: Helmet Laws, Drug Laws, etc.
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 10:17:40 GMT

 
Hello,

I am doing a report and would like to know what is the most devious act
you have done in your lifetime.  It could be of any nature(sexual, physical.
..etc) as long as it is an actual TRUE event.  

Please email me your reply at deltaur@stein.u.washington.edu and if I
get enough replies, I will combine them (making them anonymous) and post
them here.

thanks.
deltaur@stein.u.washington.edu
Xref: sparky seattle.general:4112 pnw.general:2932 alt.society.civil-liberty:6927 alt.activism:19619 alt.individualism:6099 rec.bicycles.misc:1567 talk.politics.misc:64412
From: RONEAL@lexmark.com (Randy O'Neal)
Newsgroups: seattle.general,pnw.general,alt.society.civil-liberty,misc.talk.politics,alt.activism,alt.individualism,rec.bicycles.misc,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Freedom, Social Responsibility, Individual Responsibility
Date: 15 Dec 92 21:10:28 GMT
Organization: Lexmark International, Lexington, KY
X-Disclaimer: These views are the poster's and not necessarily those of Lexmark

In article <1992Dec14.231331.10926@klic.rain.com>
keithl@klic.rain.com (Keith Lofstrom) writes:
 
>
>Yes, that is what the Constitution is for.  The founders designed a
>government to do those things, and described it in some detail.  They
>did NOT give this government carte blanche;  most of the Constitution
>describes RESTRAINTS on it's actions, such as the 10th amendment:
>
>    The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution,
>    nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States
>    respectively, or to the people.
>
>If you want to give the government more powers, write some new amendments.
>The government is not entitled by the Constitution to grant itself more
>powers.  To take powers without jumping the Constitutional hurdles is
>at best lazy and at worst leads to totalitarianism.
 
Why waste all that time and effort?  Just plaster together some 'substantive
personal freedom' or 'substantive due process' case and appear before the
supreme court like so many other factions have in recent years - they have
been able to influence the government and society with the same or greater
effect without all the time, hassles and public support of an ammendment...
all you have to do is convince a handful of justices that it's the politically
correct thing to do... This way, you don't have to get a majority of the
people to support it (this works especially well when the majority doesn't
support your case and wouldn't support it as legislation)...
 
Unfortunately, some of you out there are right now saying to yourselves 'Hey,
what a GREAT idea!' and you don't realize that our democracy has already
been polluted drastically by this very process which is nothing more than
an attempt to do an end play around the legislative due process.  Oh well...
 
 
Randy O'Neal                         "The above views are mine alone,
RONEAL@lexmark.com                    though they can be yours too for
Printer Attach Software Development   a nominal fee..."            __o
Lexmark International, Inc.                                       `\<,
Lexington, Ky.                                                    O/ O
 
Thoughts on Programming, Number 9:                                             
   For locating errors, however, we want a person who has the                  
   persistence of a mother-in-law and the collecting instincts of              
   a pack rat.                                                                 
                   -The Psychology of Computer Programming,                    
                    Gerald M. Weinberg                                         
Newsgroups: seattle.general
From: spady@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Robyn Spady)
Subject: Re: FREE CHOICE QUESTION
Organization: Boeing
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 17:01:48 GMT

In article <Bz4BI9.x8@plato.ds.boeing.com> daylan@mlssun9.telecom_group writes:
>
>Does anybody support a woman's right to have an abortion AND support the helmet law?
>
My personal opinion . . . I support a woman's right to choose . . . and I think
the helmet law is rather odd . . . When I was a child, nobody wore helmets . . .But, the way I understand it, the helmet law is not to protect the cyclist from
him/herself . . . It's to protect the cyclist from cars.

Perhaps a parallel can be drawn between the two issues (abortion and helmets)
in that both may result in fewer people being dependent upon the government for
their livelyhood.

I'm not sure helmet laws for motorcycle or bicycle enthusiasts will help reduce
the number of government-supported people.  Helmets offer little or no        
protection for the neck . . . Does that mean that we are going to end up with
a bunch of quadraplegics (sp?) instead of brain-scrambled individuals?

Newsgroups: seattle.general
From: nanook@eskimo.com (Robert Dinse)
Subject: Re: Mandatory Bicycle Helmets.
Summary: Helmets
Organization: -> ESKIMO NORTH (206) For-Ever <-
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 19:40:19 GMT

In article <1352@brat.wa.com>, donn@brat.wa.com (Donn Pedro) writes:
> In article <1992Dec9.041941.10712@eskimo.com> nanook@eskimo.com (Robert Dinse) writes:
> :     When you are riding a bicycle, YOU are the power source, and you have
> :to dissipate the heat that is the result of ineffeciencies in the process.
> :The head is the highest heat-loss part of the body, being forced to wear a
> :helmet significantly reduces your bodies ability to dissipate heat, and thus
> :ones ability to use the bicycle for excercise.
> 
> It doesn't make that much of a difference.  There have been studies of
> the core temerature of racing bicyclists while riding with, and without, 
> helmets.  It was found that core temerature did not increase significantly
> with the wearing of a helmet, even in humid and how conditions.
> 
> It was reported that the riders *felt* hotter because fo the helmet
> but soom adjusted.  Professional riders are still setting time trial 
> records, in hot conditions, wearing helmets.

     Well this is still a valid point.  I >feel< hotter, significantly, and it
is enough to turn a form of excercise I enjoy into one that I don't.  One
question that does come up though, is does this law apply anywhere or just on
public roads?  I don't ride on roads, I ride on bike trails and other places
devoid of automobile traffic.  Even if it only applies to roads, I still don't
like the law.

> The helmet technology is getting better and many designs do a pretty good
> job of keeping the head cool.

     Whether 'better' consitutes adequate is a debatable point.

> So, what about the other nine months of the year?

     I don't ride during crappy weather.  I know there's a lot of folks out
there that do, and also folks crazy enough to ride down Mercer St. or Fairview
during rush hour but I'm not one of them.

> :     Councilman Sims can go straight to hell as far as I'm concerned.
> 
> I agree.  I don't support government mandated helmet laws.
> 
> But that doesn't mean we should rationalize and make excuses for not
> wearing one.

     Why should I have to make an excuse?  It should be a matter of personal
choice as far as I'm concerned, there is no need for excuses.  If I choose to
accept the risk, for whatever reasons, that is my choice.  As I mentioned, I
do not ride where there is auto traffic, and whilst it is remotely possible
that I could find a stationairy object to crash into head first, I view it as
unlikely.

     As I mentioned, I don't ride when the weathers lousy or where there is
automotive traffic.

Newsgroups: seattle.general
From: delisle@eskimo.com (setenv Editor vi)
Subject: Re: Condoms in Public Schools
Organization: -> ESKIMO NORTH (206) For-Ever <-
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 00:26:25 GMT

	I think that part of the problem in dealing with this issue
is the introduction or religious thinking or moralism in trying to control
what is a biologic and or emotional drive that is stronger than any
Xian, Muslem, Jewish or what ever - teaching can hope to deal with,
that is the last thing on a teens mind.
	I don't know if this has always been going on or is new to this
generation or not, but giving out condoms in school will help little, 
probably allow sales, but in a private form like a vending machine
for a quarter so to quell any fear; because the kids may be too 
embarresd to approach a school official for the needed product.
	These childern will engage in sex no matter what they are told,
many continue afterwords of an ``accident(s)''. Could be that their actions
are a way of gaining some sort of emotional support from a friend or lover
that may be lacking in their own families; and craving - thus sex if a way
to get it. On the other hand it is just plain fun.
	Allthough this maybe a dangerous (idea) what about requiring
mandentory abortions for any/all minors that get pregnet as it would be
a much cheaper alternative than providing for the needs of a teenager 
trying to raise a child. This could be a a threat as it is a nasty
proceduer that could be as emotionaly devistating as child birth to a child. 

(you may begin flaming)
From: donn@brat.wa.com (Donn Pedro)
Newsgroups: seattle.general
Subject: Re: Mandatory Bicycle Helmets.
Date: 15 Dec 92 19:09:51 GMT
Organization: Tandemonium, Kent, WA

In article <Bz9EnM.LD1@bcstec.ca.boeing.com> spady@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Robyn Spady) writes:
:Does anyone out there believe that the need for mandatory use of bicycle helmetswould diminish is Seattle provided halfway decent bikepaths . . . or for that
:matter, just develop bikepaths?  

I don't feel there is a need for the law, just for education.

Bike paths are not that much safer.  

:I know the cost would be considerable . . . But, wouldn't it make good sense to
:make bicycling around this city a little easier and safer?

Bike paths will help, but they are not *the* answer.  Education and properly
engineered roads go further towards meeting your questions.




         Donn Pedro ....................a.k.a. donn@brat.wa.com
	
	       "You talk the talk.  Do you walk the walk?"

		    There are no ordinary moments.
Newsgroups: seattle.general
From: randall@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Michael Randall)
Subject: Re: smog laws
Organization: Gizmologists Ltd.
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 20:10:34 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.205118.2223@kopachuk.uucp> dcb@kopachuk.uucp (David Breneman) writes:
>
>This is, as far as I know, only the case in Seattle.  Nobody else is
>required to have pollution checks, so I would assume that this is a
>city requirement not a state one.
>-- 
>David Breneman     Sys Admin, Tacoma Screw Products, Inc. |  ____  ____  ____
>dcb@tacoma.uucp           |   SCREWIE the TSP CLOWN sez-  |   /   /___  /___/ 

There are several Areas where smog checks are required. They depend on
geographical location, population density etc. When I lived outside of
Puyallup in Pierce County (just south of King Co. which Seattle is in)
pollution checks were not required. Living in Issaquah, (East of Seattle
about 10-15 minutes) I am required to have my car checked bi-annually.
-- 
  Zvpunry J. Enaqnyy           | Jung qbrf n fanvy fnl jura vg evqrf ba gur
  enaqnyy@opfgrp.pn.obrvat.pbz | onpx bs n ghegyr? "Jurrrr!"
   ...!hharg!opfgrp!enaqnyy    | --Gnxra sebz fbzrbar ba Gur Pbzrql Punaary
From: donn@brat.wa.com (Donn Pedro)
Newsgroups: seattle.general
Subject: Re: Condoms in Public Schools
Date: 13 Dec 92 16:12:32 GMT
Organization: Tandemonium, Kent, WA

In article <MS-C.724117182.1103527590.mrc@Ikkoku-Kan.Panda.COM> mrc@Ikkoku-Kan.Panda.COM (Mark Crispin) writes:

Quite a long article on the subject.

I'd like to commend you, Mark.  You wrote in a direct manner, one
that may bother a few, but there were a few real truths, or "clues"
in what you wrote.  There was really a lot there.

And, aside from the 'liberal' thing, you stayed away from the 
characterizations that just detract from many your articles.

Again, insightful article with a lot of good points.




         Donn Pedro ....................a.k.a. donn@brat.wa.com
	
	       "You talk the talk.  Do you walk the walk?"

		    There are no ordinary moments.
Newsgroups: seattle.general
From: spady@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Robyn Spady)
Subject: Re: Mandatory Bicycle Helmets.
Organization: Boeing
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 17:16:33 GMT

Does anyone out there believe that the need for mandatory use of bicycle helmetswould diminish is Seattle provided halfway decent bikepaths . . . or for that
matter, just develop bikepaths?  

I'm originally from Portland, OR and the city seems much more supportive of
bicyclists that Seattle, WA.  It appears to me that getting around on a bicycle
in Seattle is dangerous . . . I think that Norm Rice et al. should be more
supportive of bicycles and help develop the Seattle area into one that is
more encouraging for those that wish to get around on two wheels.

One of my neighbors gave up riding her bike to work (through Ballard) because
she felt it was not worth risking her life.

I know the cost would be considerable . . . But, wouldn't it make good sense to
make bicycling around this city a little easier and safer?

Robyn



Newsgroups: seattle.general
From: dcb@kopachuk.uucp (David Breneman)
Subject: Re: Freedom, Social Responsibility, Individual Responsibility
Keywords: Helmet Laws, Drug Laws, etc.
Organization: Tacoma Screw Products, Inc.
Distribution: seattle
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 16:10:16 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.195122.22434@tc.fluke.COM> eris@tc.fluke.COM (Chris Beckmeyer) writes:

>does washington state provide search/rescue services free to the "victim"?
>the state of nevada (or at least the particular county i lived in) did NOT.
>i recall an incident where three or four days of helicopter searching for
>a child lost in the desert resulted in a bill to the parents of somewhere
>between 40 and 50 thousand dollars. 

Good!

>                                     'course the community jumped in with a
>zillion donations/fund raisers to cover it.

Also good!

This sounds like a perfect free-society solution to this kind of problem:

1) The kid was saved.
2) Nobody "contributed" money for the rescue against their will.
3) Friends and neighbors pitched in to help the family.
4) No laws needed to be passed preventing people from going into the desert.


-- 
David Breneman     Sys Admin, Tacoma Screw Products, Inc. |  ____  ____  ____
dcb@tacoma.uucp           |   SCREWIE the TSP CLOWN sez-  |   /   /___  /___/ 
 ..!uunet!tacoma!dcb      | "Zinc & cadmium plating stops |  /   ____/ / 
CompuServe: <DEAD>        |  rust & acts as a lubricant!" |
Newsgroups: seattle.general,pnw.general,alt.society.civil-liberty,misc.talk.politics,alt.activism,alt.individualism,rec.bicycles,talk.politics.misc