HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: pecampbe@mtu.edu (Paul Campbell)
Subject: Re: Traveling with a gun
Organization: Michigan Technological University
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 15:24:22 GMT

In article <viking.726743630@vincent1.iastate.edu> viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson) writes:
>	Not exactly.  According to my on-line copy:
> 
>Article IV
> 
>Section 1.    Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the
>public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State.
>And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which
>such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.
>
>Section 2.    The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all
>Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. [...]
>
>	What this says to me, a layman, is that the Fed gets to say what
>laws have to be recognized by other states, and that only those laws that
>apply in the state you are in apply to you while you are there.

What this means to me is that full faith and credit shall be given in each
State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other
State.

Secondly, Congress shall prescribe the manner in which it shall be proved.

Congress shall by general laws recognize the judicial record proceedings and
other recording mechanisms for the laws. They shall specify that what was
written in blood stains on the table after a couple legislators duked it out
can't be used to prove anything in court, but that the tape recording made
while State governor Bork Parreler was talking with some of his cronies over
their latest pardons can be used in court.

It does not say anything about Congress making up whatever they want as
laws applied to citizens in the several states, which is covered in detail
in many other sections, especially the 9th and 10th amendments.

Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: hays@ssd.intel.com (Kirk Hays)
Subject: Re: The real gamble of self-defense with a gun
Organization: Intel Supercomputer Systems Division
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 20:12:35 GMT

In article <1it58vINNgbq@flash.pax.tpa.com.au>, anon.526@pax.tpa.com.au writes:

|> Christian Brando shot and killed his sister's ex-boyfriend Dag Drollet
|> in the erroneous belief that Drollet was about to harm him or his
|> family.

Bullshit - Brando executed Drollet in a drunken rage, based on some mistruth
his psychotic sister had told him.

|> Brando is not the only example.

You'd best hope not.

|> No doubt most of you here will poo-poo this unhappy fate as an
|> extremely remote possibility.

Less likely than being struck by lightening, for me, at least.

However, I keep my nose clean, don't barge into other people's houses, and
just generally don't behave aggressively towards others.

I also stay indoors and away from electrical appliances during thunderstorms.

|> Speaking for myself, I declare that:
|> 
|> I will always give another human being nearly limitless benefit of the
|> doubt before pointing a gun at him or her.  If it means I or
|> someone in my family might die needlessly, so be it.  At least I
|> won't kill needlessly.

Fine.  If (or when) you are killed in a self defense situation, we can simply
mark it up to evolution in action.

Incidently, did anyone explain to you just how cowardly and vile it is to post
inflamatory opinions in a public forum, anonymously?

If you can't stand up for what you believe, then there is something basicly wrong
with your beliefs.

I ask because you're going into my KILL file, soon.

-- 
Kirk Hays - NRA Life, seventh generation.
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to
do nothing."  -- Edmund Burke (1729-1797)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: mpetro@brtph126.bnr.ca (Myron Petro P030)
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
Organization: BNR Inc. RTP, NC
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 18:07:10 GMT

	
>Bob DeBula wrote:
>When someone is *convicted* of a felony, confiscate their	
>drivers license or state ID card.

>Issue them a new drivers license or state ID card with a
>big red circled gun with a slash through it. Actually,
>there would be no need to issue the drivers license
>or state id card until their release from prison.

 The NRA had already suggested this. Actually they suggested a florescent 
orange drivers license. Police liked this idea because they could be more on
the alert on a traffic pull over. 
 The gun banners went ballistic for the same reason that they want a data base 
to contain gun owners rather than convicted felons. They want to know who has guns
not who shouldn't have them (they believe everybody shouldn't have them)
 
	Myron Petro
	NRA, USPSA
        DVC y'all
	**************************************************************************
	 The opinions included in this post are my sole responsibility.
	 And are protected by the First Amendment and guarnteed by the 
	 Second Amendment.
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Firearms Coalition Report of Dec '92
Date: 12 Jan 1993 22:28:18 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: rocket.sw.stratus.com
Keywords: NRA,Knox

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

> 			H A R D  C O R P S  R E P O R T
> 			
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Report No. 51 to the Firearms Coalition - Neal Knox Associates,
> P.O. Box 6537, Silver Spring, Maryland - December 18, 1992
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

> HHS is the sponsor of "Healthy People 2000," a national planning
> group that includes some 300 national medical associations, health
> insurance associations, state health departments and related groups.
> Their plan calls for, by the year 2000, "Reduc(ing) by 20 percent the
> proportion of weapons that are inappropriately stored and therefore
> dangerously available."

> 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.
-- 

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
From: amirza@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Anmar Caves)
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 15:03:01 GMT

In article <9301101310.47@rmkhome.UUCP> rmkhome!rmk@merk.com (Rick Kelly) writes:
>In article <16B522ACC.PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu> PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu (David Veal) writes:

>>
>>      I've seen you shift topics without blinking, but I'll be damned
>>if I can figure out just how this one happened.
>
>>       Due Process means that for my rights to be taken by the state,
>>it must prove that *I* personally, not some group or something, am in
>>violation of the law.
>
>Right.  And checking somebody's record when they buy a gun doesn't take
>their rights away, unless their record warrants it.

This runs bass ackwards from wht you were saying in a prvious post
about how if we had instant background checks all sorts of privacy
laws would have to change, which was also untrue.  I'll say that yes,
you are and AI, and that you just failed your Turing Test.

>>
>>       It's kind of sad just how completely wrong you are.
>
>Well, I guess I'll have to start listening to my scanner more often.

Yes, you should.  Then ask why the police now want to have "secure"
communications. 
>>
>>       I have all kinds of insurance on my car, but I've never needed
>>to make a claim on it.  That doesn't mean, though, that I can do without
>>it.
>
>And I live in a state that mandates just what insurance you will have to
>have on your car.

And just how many times have you had to draw your insurance to scare
away an assaulting motorist?

-- 
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: jkapson@ad-29.Naitc.Com (John Kapson)
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
Organization: AC Nielsen Co., Bannockburn IL
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 16:38:09 GMT

In article <9301092258.38@rmkhome.UUCP> rmkhome!rmk@merk.com (Rick Kelly) writes:
[snip]
>>WELL DONE!  Criminals can circumvent ANY gun control scheme you care to put 
>>in place.
>
>Except for one that requires taking of finger prints as a basis for
>identification.

Has Kelly heard of "strawman purchases"?

+-----------------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
|      John Kapson      |                                                     |
| NRA               ILA |      "...to disarm the people (is) the best         |
| jkapson@nis.naitc.com |      and most effective way to enslave them..."     |
|                       |      George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 380         |
|                       |                                                     |
+-----------------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
|                  PGP Public Key available via email                         |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
From: rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly)
Organization: The Man With Ten Cats
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 17:02:02 GMT
Reply-To: rmkhome!rmk@merk.com (Rick Kelly)

In article <1993Jan5.224957.837@Firewall.Nielsen.Com> jkapson@ad-29.Naitc.Com (John Kapson) writes:
>In article <9301051207.02@rmkhome.UUCP> rmkhome!rmk@merk.com (Rick Kelly) writes:
>[snip]
>>When you have state governments that seem to release convicted murderers
>>and armed robbers on a whim, then you have to have some means of keeping
>>them from buying weapons.
>
>It seems the most effective means would be to keep them in prison, then.
>
>Note that Kelly ignores the fact that it is already illegal most (all?) places
>for "convicted murderers and armed robbers" to purchase firearms (as well
>as simple possession being a parole violation in that case).
>
>Does Kelly contend that "convicted murderers and armed robbers" would not
>have easy access to 'alternative' weapons sources should conventional gun
>shops require background checks, letters of reference, fingerprints,
>waiting periods, and a kiss on the cheek from the local police chief?

Ah, but what I have been hearing here is that there should be no laws 
governing the sale of weapons.  That the sale of a weapon should only
hinge on whether the buyer has the money in his/her hand.

-- 

Rick Kelly    rmkhome!rmk@merk.com    merk!rmkhome!rmk    rmk@frog.UUCP
From: bbx!therev!maf@unmvax.cs.unm.edu (Mark A. Foster)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Liability insurance for gun dealers ?
Date: 11 Jan 93 16:18:56 GMT
Organization: therev.UUCP - A Dinky Usenet Node in Los Alamos, NM

In article <1993Jan10.032729.9945@cbnews.cb.att.com>,
   lvc@cbvox1.att.com wrote:

#The post about the SKS slam-fire reminded me I have been meaning
#to find out what type of liability insurance is available to gun
#dealers.  What sort of coverage is available, what does it cost,
#does NASD or other dealer organizations offer it to members.

   My store insurance is through an NRA sponsored plan that is administered
by Kirke Van-Orsdel, Inc.  The policy is from Joseph Chiarello and Sons, in
New Jersey.  This same plan is also offered by the National Association of
Federally Licensed Firearms Dealers.  You can get information about the
plan by calling the NRA Insurance number on the back of your membership
card.

   The plan offers $1 million in liability protection for a base rate of
$1500 per year for firearms and accessories sales.  There are additional
premiums if you are doing gunsmithing, reloading (which includes SELLING
reloaded ammunition), manufacturing, importing, or running a range.  The
premiums increase at a breakpoint that is determined by the sales gross per
year.  I don't have the information here, but as I recall it's $35 premium
per $1k sales.  I'll send more information when I get to the store.

#--
#Larry Cipriani, att!cbvox1!lvc or lvc@cbvox1.att.com

    Mark

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    Mark A. Foster -> maf@therev.UUCP -> {backbone}!unmvax!bbx!therev!maf
                                   or -> bbx!therev!maf@unmvax.cs.unm.edu

"You wonder why I lie awake at night -
 Well, I just can't get to sleep.
 It's not the devils or the feelings inside,
 It's the peace of mind that I seek."
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: DENNIS_@NCSU.EDU (DGA)
Subject: Re: pro-gun TV?
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 15:33:18 GMT

In article <csjohn.726251662@watson.mtsu.edu> csjohn@watson.mtsu.edu (J Wallace) writes:
>From: csjohn@watson.mtsu.edu (J Wallace)
>Subject: Re: pro-gun TV?
>Date: 5 Jan 1993 10:37:30 -0600
>In <1993Jan4.151238.814@uoft02.utoledo.edu> jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu (jason 'Think!' steiner) writes:
>
>>i turned on the TV the other day & caught a scene with Mariel Hemingway
>>(Civil Wars?). her character was trapped in an elevator with someone who
>>was making unwelcome advances ("Oh, you like it rough eh?"). she then 
>>proceeded to pull a pistol from her purse, at which point the 
>>agressor started talking -really- fast. anyone else see this? could it
>>be the start of media showing handguns as useful for something besides
>>slaughtering innocent children?
>
>>jason
>
>Don't believe it.  They will show ONE scene like this for a HUNDRED
>others that are clearly anti-RTKBA.  This is what THEY call showing
>both sides.  This is what I call throwing you a bone.
>-- 
>John Wallace   

This is just a "for what it's worth" comment.

Don't forget Mariel Hemingway IS a shooter, hunter, and John Hemingway 
offspring.  (Not to mention gorgeous.)  Even so, in another episode, she and 
clients were held at bay by a wacko with a CAR-15(?). As he was being 
disarmed by an ex-general he ripped the office with a FULL-auto burst.  No 
mention of how he came into posession of the weapon. 

DGA
From: speednut@werple.apana.org.au (Mark Jose)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Criminal rehabilitation?  Hah!
Date: 10 Jan 1993 12:18:37 +1100
Organization: werple public-access unix, Melbourne
NNTP-Posting-Host: werple.apana.org.au

G'day Dan,
 
>        Ar the risk of being cheeky, it's the USA version of Austrailia
>to the Brits of over a century ago.  Look how both turned out.
 
Ok, ok. Explain yourself. I can't let this one slip through to the
keeper.
 
Cheers from Australia.
                ^^^
                 :-)
 
 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you want to reply [why would you want to do that? :-)] then please
email me a copy, thanks.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: pro-gun TV?
From: jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu (jason 'Think!' steiner)
Date: 4 Jan 93 15:12:38 EST
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

i turned on the TV the other day & caught a scene with Mariel Hemingway
(Civil Wars?). her character was trapped in an elevator with someone who
was making unwelcome advances ("Oh, you like it rough eh?"). she then 
proceeded to pull a pistol from her purse, at which point the 
agressor started talking -really- fast. anyone else see this? could it
be the start of media showing handguns as useful for something besides
slaughtering innocent children?

jason

--
`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`
`,` "True love is better than anything, except cough drops."            `,`
`,`                     - The Princess Bride (book), by William Goldman `,`
`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,` jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu ,`,`,`
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: jeffs@austlcm.sps.mot.com (jeff stump)
Subject: NRA and NEVADA ?
Organization: Motorola Inc, Austin, Texas
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 21:13:12 GMT


  I saw *part* of a story last week 
concerning an upcomming court case
involving the NRA in Nevada or 
Arizona. The parts I did manage to 
hear seemed to be about the rights
of children (age 5 and up) to 
carry pistols legally. After problems
in schools ...ect the legislature
was trying to make this illegal but,
the NRA was going to court to block
the new law.
  Now, the way I heard the story
(of course,unbiased,reliable news
accounts) ah hem :) , was the new
law would resrtict only children 
from toating pistols. 
  Can somebody brief me on what the
real story is ????

--
***********************************************************
**  Jeff Stump                                           **
**  Motorola Inc, Austin, Texas                          **
**  E-mail:  jeffs@austlcm.sps.mot.com                   **
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: lvc@cbnews.cb.att.com (Larry Cipriani)
Subject: Re: communists + anarchists in the NRA
Organization: Ideology Busters, Inc.
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 14:05:45 GMT

In article <1993Jan5.161623.9558@uvm.edu> aforum@moose.uvm.edu (autonome forum) writes:
>
>Just curious: how many other communists/anarchists are there in the
>NRA besides us?

Not all anarchists are leftists.

>Hopefully there are some other leftists in the group; we can't let it
>get totally dominated by right-wing freaks!

I don't see any right-wing freaks here.

Liberals such as Don Kates, James Wright and Gary Kleck have made
significant contributions to RKBA literature; but, if the best
far-leftists can come up with is the sort of stuff you posted no
wonder you aren't taken seriously by very many people.
-- 
Larry Cipriani, att!cbvox1!lvc or lvc@cbvox1.att.com
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
Date: 12 Jan 1993 22:58:47 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: rocket.sw.stratus.com

In article <DLB.93Jan12162719@fanny.wash.inmet.com>, dlb@fanny.wash.inmet.com (David Barton) writes:

> Ah ha!  A difference in legal terminology.
> 
> In this case (confusing, I know) a "civil infraction" is still a
> criminal matter; a civil infraction is not tried in a civil
> proceeding, but in a criminal proceeding...

On the contrary -- I read a court verdict on this subject recently.
The case in quesion was a suit by a man who sued in CA for trial by
jury on a traffic offense.  The ruling was that "infractions" were
a separate class of offenses from "crimes," and that there was no 
right to trial by jury in an administrative (not a criminal) court.
-- 

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
From: donb@igor.tamri.com (Don Baldwin)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
Date: 6 Jan 93 00:31:52 GMT
Organization: TOSHIBA America MRI, South San Francisco, CA

In article <C0E219.G9u@SSD.intel.com> hays@ssd.intel.com (Kirk Hays) writes:
>I find this personally amusing.  I grew up in Arizona several decades ago, in
>several different rural areas, and we kids brought (*gasp*) guns to school,
>regularly.
>
>In the 5th grade, in particular, I had a teacher who loved hunting doves.  In
>season, the boys and girls in his class would bring in our personal shotguns,
>most of us riding on the school buses, and go dove hunting before class in the
>millet fields across the road from the school.
               :
>You'll excuse me, I hope, if I don't broadcast the school's name - I'd hate to
>sic the liberal education establishment on them.

I'm jealous!  Growing up in New York State (Niagara/Buffalo), I didn't have
an opportunity to actually fire a real gun until I was about 17.  Then, I
found the .22 semi-auto pistol that my dad left behind, when he moved out.

Going down into the basement, I carefully set up a backstop of used books,
loaded the gun and fired.  The book-shredding that resulted wasn't exactly
awe-inspiring but it did serve to satisfy my desire to target shoot, until
I made it out to California and could (by comparison) buy my own pistol
reasonably easy and use it on a safe target.

Wasn't sure if this qualified as a rec.guns "stupid shooters trick" but,
since I was only guesstimating how much backstop to set up, I may have
very been lucky.  What I'm getting around to saying is that safe shooting in
a school setting is probably very safe...whereas leaving kids ignorant
about guns is very dangerous.

    don
From: osan@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (Mr. X)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
Date: 6 Jan 93 17:13:52 GMT
Organization: Twilight Zone

In article <9301051932.51@rmkhome.UUCP> rmkhome!rmk@merk.com (Rick Kelly) writes:
>
>Would it make you feel good inside to know that ex-cons who were in for
>murder or armed robbery could legally buy guns?

	If a person is fit to release into public life, i.e., he has paid
	his "debt to society", then full rights should be restored.  If
	you can't trust him with a gun, why would you want him roaming free?
	After all, no matter WHAT the law says, yo will never be able stop
	such a person from purchasing a weapon, short of having him followed
	on a 24 hour a day basis by a cop or parole officer or what have you.

	If I don't feel comfortable with a person having a gun, I most likely
	will not feel any less uncomfortable if I saw him walking out of
	K-Mart with a large kitchen knife, of a baseball bat, or any of
	a hundred thousand other objects.  If this is the case, then I think
	perhaps Harry ought to be back in prison.

	Either your debt is discharged, or it is not.  I do not believe it is
	right to malign and continue to punish  person after they have been
	officially deemed to have paid their debt.  I can easily see how this
	could constitute cruel and unusual punishment.  If I berak a neighbors
	window and pay for the repair, my debt is paid.  It  would not be
	considered right to force me to continue paying for the rest of my
	life.  The same principle applies even to murderers and rapists.
	If what they did was so heinous that they ought to pay for their
	crimes  for the rest of their lives, then let them remain in prison.
	Anyone that is THAT dangerous, or who has done so awful an act ought
	not be free in the first place.  But for the petty thief who has 
	paid his debt and poses no threat to the safety and wellbeing to the
	public ought not be villified for life.  That is ridiculous.

	-Andy V.
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 00:50:05 GMT
Reply-To: rmkhome!rmk@merk.com (Rick Kelly)

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?

-- 

Rick Kelly    rmkhome!rmk@merk.com    merk!rmkhome!rmk    rmk@frog.UUCP
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns