HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: robs@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Robert Sipe)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: After the election....
Keywords: disgusted Clinton NRA
Date: 7 Nov 92 00:48:41 GMT
Organization: Boeing

In article <73908@hydra.gatech.EDU> gt6190a@prism.gatech.EDU (Stephen Burr) writes:
>Well, I went and did it.
>
>The day after Clinton was elected to the White House, I sent in my
>application to the NRA.
>
>Nuff said, I think.




Better late than never!








-- 
Statement made by Oliver North when asked to comment on Clinton's draft
record.  "I would rather vote for Jane Fonda than Gov. Clinton!  At least
she has been to North Vietnam."
From: cecchini@acsu.buffalo.edu (Julie A Cecchini)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: You can't fast forward through the next four years
Date: 11 Nov 92 23:01:14 GMT
Organization: UB

In article <1992Nov5.01638.15165@ms.uky.edu> miles@ms.uky.edu (Stephen D. Grant) writes:
>Well Libertarian voters, I haven't heard much about your "message" sent
>to Congress. Can anybody help me? Show me how your vote helped the RKBA cause.
>right...

YOU were that vote.  YOU weren't there.
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Re: You can't fast forward through the next four years
Date: 13 Nov 92 01:16:04 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: rocket.sw.stratus.com

In article <1992Nov12.135956.23704@news.yale.edu>, watt-alan@net.yale.edu (Alan Watt) writes:

> I keep hearing how Congresscritters do read their mail and pay attention
> to it; I've seen no evidence of this in my correspondence.  My general
> experience is this:  I send a letter on a topic stating my opinions;
> back comes a response that appears to address my letter, but is in fact
> a form-letter, or perhaps a composite of several stock paragraphs...

> My impression is the letters are processed 99% by staff members, who
> simply stuff some canned response in a return envelope.  There are
> canned responses for the "pro" side and canned responses for the "anti"
> side.  Both say vague reassuring things.

Up here, I had the pleasure of receiving a form letter that was the same
for the pro AND the anti side:

  Thank you for writing, etc., this issue certainly is a problem...

  Some people <space, space> maintain that...

  Others <space, space> like you <space, space> are concerned over...

  Please be assured I will do my best to ensure that this issue is
  addressed properly, etc.

This was from the same Representative who, when asked to intercede with
a federal agency that wasn't doing its job, forwarded my letter to them,
got a version of the same fuck-you letter from them that I already had
("We're too goddamn busy to do what we promised, we'll call YOU,") and
forwarded it to me with, "Here's the agency's response.  I was glad to
be able to help.  If you haven't heard more from them after 90 days,
write me again."  And I have TWO of these.

And he was the RESPONSIVE congressman.  You think my Senators even
bothered to ackowledge even RECEIVING my mail?

> I don't disparage the effort of writing Congresscritters, but I still
> believe the "message" they listen to more than any other is the election
> night returns.  If you can't make your point there, all the letters in
> the world won't have much effect.

You're absolutely right.  His ass is now history, and the other two 
are coming up REAL soon.
-- 

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: wwarf@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Wayne J. Warf)
Subject: Re: Queston on NRA Funding
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 16:39:03 GMT

In article <2622@cronos.metaphor.com> howard@Metaphor.COM (Lee Howard) writes:
>This weekend I was embroiled in a heated discussion about gun control
>with some of my on-this-subject-unenlightened friends, and the issue
>of NRA funding came up.  My friends argued (without providing numbers)
>that the arms manufacturers "own" the NRA by virtue of their financial
>contributions; I argued (without providing numbers) that a) the arms
>manufacturers are in such financial straits that they don't have
>much to spare, and b) whatever arms industry does give, it is merely
>a drop in the bucket compared to the contributions of 3 million
>members.
>
>Can anybody help me locate data on NRA funding?
>
>Thanks a lot.
>
>--- lee  KC6KXI  NRA-Life     Support the NRA/ILA/PVF ---
>

Contact the NRA directly, they are audited every year and publish a
financial report and information on funding. Not only do arms 
manufacturers NOT own the NRA, they give very little financial
support of any kind to any firearms programs, usually just token
amounts. This argument is the last refuge of anyone without much
to say of substance.


-- 
 +--------------------------------------------------------------------+
 | Wayne J. Warf -- WWARF@ucs.indiana.edu -- I speak for myself only  |
 | Midterm Countdown-Bill and the Congress have to '94 to screw it up |
 +--------------------------------------------------------------------+
From: vojak@icebucket.stortek.com (Bill Vojak)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Life under Clinton
Date: 6 Nov 92 14:36:16 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Storage Technology Corp.
Originator: vojak@icebucket.stortek.com

rsopicki@pro-amber.cts.com (Randy Sopicki) writes:

>What do you all think is going to happen under a Bill Clinton
>administration?

 Well,

 As a white male,  I'm Fucked.
 As a Upper-Middle income earner,  I'm Fucked.
 As a Gun owner,  I'm Fucked.
 As a scanner (police type, not computer type) owner,  I'm Fucked.
 As a soon to be dual professional income household,  I'm Fucked.
 As a Non-Correct-Thinker,  I'm Fucked.
 As a supporter of the death penalty and strict mandatory sentencing,  I'm Fucked.

 Any more questions??????

 Of course several major psychics have predicted that Clinton won't live to see
 day one of his presidency.  That would leave us with President Gore running
 things.  What does happen if both the president, and vice-president elect die
 BEFORE they are sworn in?  Does the speaker of the house take over, or is there
 another process??????

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

------------------------------------------
Anti-Gun President, Anti-Gun Congress,
Better buy what you want BEFORE Dec 31.
----------------------------------------
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson)
Subject: Re: You can't fast forward through the next four years
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 06:37:20 GMT

In <1992Nov5.01745.15243@ms.uky.edu> miles@ms.uky.edu (Stephen D. Grant) writes:

>I believe the NRA Bush letters were only sent to states where the Bush
>Clinton race was considered close. ?

	That would have been most of them, according to the Des Moines
Register this morning.  Iowa has something like 600K Democrat, 512K
Republican, and 500K independent.  Perot didn't do incredibly well here,
and neither did Bush or Clinton, though Clinton was the popular vote.  I
didn't see word one about Marrou or any of the other candidates in either
the literature sent to me by the NRA or in the newspapers.

	Personally, I've converted all my assets into cash and will be
shortly turning that into firearms, preferably those of the "soon to be
banned" variety.  They won't be much, but their growth rate has got
to be better than the rate of interest on bonds and the like.

	Heh!  I can't lose!  I either get to keep my guns or afford
the last year of college!

< 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.  >
<  "This isn't an answer, it's a pagan dance around a midnight fire  >
<   written in intellectual runes." -- Rich Young                    >
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: sjo@cci632.cci.com (Steve Owens)
Subject: Re: Clinton/Gore & Sarah Brady
Organization: [Computer Consoles, Inc., Rochester, NY
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 10:54:05 GMT

In article <7797@transfer.stratus.com> cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares) writes:
>In article <1992Oct28.223304.15679@dg-rtp.dg.com>, meyers@leonardo.rtp.dg.com (Bill Meyers) writes:
>> In article <ATAYLOR.92Oct22174532@gauss.nmsu.edu> ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy) writes:
>> >
>> >[lots of text about Sarah Brady deleted]
>> >
>> ><Is there any proof that she ever was a Republican?  
>
>In the mass-e-mailed Clinton puff piece that has been bombarding 
>various newsgroups, she is quoted as saying in her endorsement of
>Clinton that it was a shame that she had to go outside "her" party
>to find someone who would support the Brady Bill.

	Question is: Did she ever wonder *why* she needed to go outside
her party for support?  Might have saved us a lot of trouble in the long
run.  :-)

>-- 
>
>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...


				Steve


------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Read between the lines                             Steven J Owens @ CCI
 Criticize the words they're selling             (716) 482-5000 Ext 2867
 Think for yourself and feel the walls                 sjo@op632.cci.com
 Become sand beneath your feet." - Queensryche "Anybody Listening?"
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: You can't fast forward through the next four years
Date: 9 Nov 92 17:25:22 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: rocket.sw.stratus.com

In article <1992Nov9.134701.6818@news.yale.edu>, watt-alan@net.yale.edu (Alan Watt) writes:

> I think all the politicians who retired
> because they feared the impending voters' wrath are kicking themselves
> about now.

Don't cry for them.  Many of them ACTUALLy quit because this is the last
year they could convert their large campaign chests to personal funds upon
leaving Congress.
-- 

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...
From: gt6190a@prism.gatech.EDU (Stephen Burr)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: After the election....
Keywords: disgusted Clinton NRA
Date: 6 Nov 92 17:25:05 GMT
Organization: Georgia Tech

Well, I went and did it.

The day after Clinton was elected to the White House, I sent in my
application to the NRA.

Nuff said, I think.

-
-- 
Stephen Burr               | "My first time voting in a presidential  
Georgia Tech,              |  election... What a letdown."  -me 
Atlanta Georgia, 30332     |  Government - 
gt6190a@prism.gatech.edu   |      the last refuge of the nincompoop. 
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: skeeter@skatter.usask.ca
Subject: Re: A thought on the comming gun bans
Organization: University of Saskatchewan
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 20:16:00 GMT

From article <1992Nov11.032809.23640@ucsu.Colorado.EDU>, by fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary):
> In article <urbin.84.721407063@interlan.interlan.com> urbin@interlan.interlan.com (Mark Urbin) writes:
>>   Where the people in New York City compensated for the legally registered 
>>rifles that were declared illegal and then collected by the Police?
> 
> Did anyone sue the city over this? (I suspect the Supreme Court would
> insist on compensation, but that doesn't mean the local governments
> will automatically and uniformly act within the Constitution.)
> 
>                                          Frank Crary
>                                          CU Boulder

In Canada (and the US) the government "cannot" simply confiscate items
that were once legally owned and indeed _registered_ to the owner.
There "must" be compensation when they decide to ban these things.  (I
say "cannot" and "must" because you'd have to challenge them in court to
ensure it happens.)  British Common Law does not permit confiscation of
once-legal items without "fair" compensation.

Where there has been no registration (or other "proof of ownership") it
can get a bit messy, but when the weapon (or whatever) was registered to
you by the gov't, they sanctioned it's existance. 


--
skeeter@skatter.usask.ca			no nifty .sig

The weight of one's wallet is inversly proportional to the size of
one's heart.   -- me
From: m0102@tnc.UUCP (FRANK NEY)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Need Better NRA Ads NOW !
Date: 7 Nov 92 20:08:06 GMT
Reply-To: m0102@tnc.UUCP (FRANK NEY)
Organization: The Next Challenge, Fairfax, Va.


> Innocent people are killed in that kind of raid.

So are cops.  For example, that no-knock in Tennesee.

Frank Ney N4ZHG EMT-A  LPVa NRA ILA GOA CCRTKBA "M-O-U-S-E"
Commandant and Acting President, Northern Virginia Free Militia
Send e-mail for an application and more information
----------------------------------------------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.0
 
mQCNAirUyJMAAAEEAKK/r+uYOEAGbU4w6pxwcY0h9EiB+9EELFNXIoN/q486w28i
cipfkm9NaJd1Oox24SV/JojQeukgJVied+qaZdE7mxUd9CQEru/2q2JS55h4xqdj
Ta/Gk/w9UUY+MMJfCJqRxYCbP0ENwuuWkteVsHwo2YUDlEpAOA+GiP76u4NfAAUR
tCFGcmFuayBOZXkgPG0wMTAyQHRuYy51dWNwLlVVLk5FVD4=
=wNcL
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
-- 
The Next Challenge - Public Access Unix in Northern Va. - Washington D.C.
703-803-0391 To log in for trial and account info.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: jimc@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Jim Cox)
Subject: Re: 2nd Ammendment
Organization: Motorola Inc., Austin Tx.
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 18:28:39 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.170211.18927@cbfsb.cb.att.com> colten@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (marc.colten) writes:
>
>In the first place who said they couldn't "carry concealed" - they
>could apply for licenses and get the guns.

Not true.  "Carry concealed" is illegal in Texas.

>                                                       Or on anyone
>else since it is in infringement of our rights to even ask us who
>we are, or make us wait while they see if the id we have is real.

Another statement that is not true.

>So maybe 50% of the people in the restaurant in Killeen were sitting
>there comfortably with .38's on them. 

Not true again. 0 as in (zero) were armed.

> And the guy walks in with a semi-automatic rifle.  

Not true again.  I think that a pattern is developing - one of lies.

>marc colten

I deleted a bunch of crap out of Marc's message, there were more lies 
is the deleted part also.

Facts do not appear to be high on your list do they Marc?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
"I will not raise taxes on the middle class to pay for these programs."
     Bill Clinton's response to Susan Rook in the 3rd Presidential debate.

"Even though I disagree with Mr. Perot on how fast we can reduce the deficit
 and how much we can raise the taxes on the middle class..."
     Bill Clinton's closing remarks in the 3rd Presidential debate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Jim Cox                            Internet: jimc@bartman.sps.mot.com
Phone: (512) 891-3182          UUCP Address: cs.utexas.edu!oakhill!otis!jimc
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: IZZYOE8@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU (Daniel)
Subject: Act Now!
Date: 10 Nov 92 12:03:17 PST

TO ALL OF US,
EVERY DAY I READ WELL WRITTEN AND INTELLIGENT (FOR THE MOST PART)
POSTINGS IN THIS NEWS GROUP.  IT MAKES ME HAPPY TO KNOW THERE ARE
MANY SMART PEOPLE OUT THERE WHO BELIEVE IN THE RKBA.  HOWEVER IT
SEEMS TO ME THAT ALL THIS ENERGY IS SPENT SCREAMING AT EACH OTHER
AND NOT THOSE WHO DESERVE IT.  HOW COME I NEVER SEE LETTERS LIKE
THE ONES I FIND POSTED HERE IN THE NEWSPAPER OR SPOKEN ON RADIO
AND TV EDITORIALS?  IMAGINE HOW EXCITING IT WOULD BE TO POUND THESE
LAME ARGUMENTS OF THE "GUN GRABBERS" PUBLICALLY.  WHEN I READ THE
LETTERS POSTED BY THIS NEWS GROUP, I FEEL LIKE RUNNING HOME AND
SENDING HUGE CHECKS TO THE NRA.  MAYBE MORE PEOPLE COULD BE MADE
TO FEEL THIS WAY, IF YOUR WORDS COULD BE MADE MORE PUBLIC.  MAYBE
THIS NEWS GROUP SHOULD FORM ITS OWN FIREARMS PROTECTION AGENCY.
MAYBE, MAYBE NOT.  NEVERTHELESS, I FEEL MANY A GREAT WORDS AND DEBATES
ARE BEING LOST IN THE COMPUTER MEMORY GARBAGE CAN.  NOT COMPLETELY,
LOST,HOWEVER, BECAUSE THEY SEEM TO BE ENERGIZING ME.  I FIND MYSELF
WANTING TO JOIN ALL KINDS OF FIREARMS ORGANIZATIONS.
----
AM I JUST RETARDED OR DO I HAVE A POINT?
DANIEL
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy)
Subject: Re: Science Fiction (Was: I HATE to vote for Bush! But...)
Organization: NMSU Computer Science
	<ATAYLOR.92Nov6134541@gauss.nmsu.edu>
	<1992Nov09.222610.5839@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 15:43:33 GMT

<In article <1992Nov09.222610.5839@microsoft.com> alane@microsoft.com (Alan Ezekiel) writes:
<   ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy) writes:
<   >nadja@jetsun.weitek.COM (Nadja Adolf) writes:
<   >
<   ><  On the other hand, Democrat Tom Foley hasn't been seen supporting
<   ><   any gun grabbing... 
<   >
<   >	On what planet? 
<   >
<   >	Foley endorsed the Brady Bill, now didn't he?

<   Tom Foley is one of two Washington state Democratic congressfolks (along
<   with Jolene Unsoeld) to receive an 'A' rating from the NRA.  Mr. Foley
<   is *definitely* pro-gun.

	Huh. I'll check this; I still recall Foley supporting
	Brady over Staggers.

<   Let's try not to slander our friends, please -- we need 'em now more
<   than ever.

	Indeed. Let's also be sure who our friends are; "summer
	soldiers and sunshine patriots", and all that.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: PA142548@utkvm1.utk.edu (T. Archer)
Subject: Re: A thought on the comming gun bans
Keywords: To purchase, or not to purchase....
Organization: University of Tennessee 
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 17:16:55 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.032113.22191@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary) writes:
>>>Mostly becuase of the Fifth Amendment to our Constitution: "...[no 
>>>person shall] be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without
>>>due process of law; nor shall private priperty be taken for public
>>>use without just compensation." The current Supreme Court reasonably
>
>> Yea, tell that to the victims of the DEA's confiscation policy. I believe
>>it has to do wit something called the "RICO Act" ??? (is that right?).
>
>That is quite different from a general ban or confiscation: The RICO
>statutes apply _only_ to property used (or suspected of being 
>used) to commit some other crime (e.g. if the police think you
>are smuggling drugs and confiscate your car). I suppose RICO 
>could be applied to a case where the police siezed a gun, on the
>suspician it was used during a crime, but not if the government
>simply banned them. (By the way, I don't approve with the RICO 
>statutes or the Court's acceptance of them. However, the Court
>seems to make a distinction between them, and general confiscations.)

Yes, but if you gun was banned, and the possession of it made a crime, then 
it would, be definition, be considered to be "used in a crime."

Now we run into the good old "no ex-post-facto" doctrine.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Vote Dempublican, it's easier than thinking.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: glngar01@uctvax.uct.ac.za
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: 2nd Ammendment
Date: 13 Nov 92 15:58:10 GMT
Organization: University of Cape Town

In article <1992Nov11.022759.12655@ttinews.tti.com>, hollombe@polymath.tti.com (The Polymath) writes:
> 
> In article <73907@hydra.gatech.EDU>, gt1111a@prism.gatech.EDU (Vincent Fox) writes:
> 
> }Ahem. The guy in Killeen had a Glock. This is a relatively short-barrelled
> }pistol.  Like most pistols, the range at which you can actually hit anything
> }is about 10 feet, good knife range. Beyond that, only the most amazing amount
> }of luck, practice and a much better pistol than a Glock will allow you to hit
                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^  
 }the side of a barn. ...   

You don't get much better (though I would prefer a H&K MP-5K)
> 
> Ahem yourself.  This is utter rubbish.
> 
> The Glock is one of the best combat pistols on the market.  I can shoot
> 2.5" groups with one at 25 feet all day -- and I don't like Glocks (I can
> shoot 1" groups at that distance with a SIG -- a pistol I'm particularly
> fond of).  I know people who can easily do the same at 25 _yards_.

From what I remember, His gun was a Glock 17 (17 shot 9mm)

I can personally, with my own Glock 19 (with a 4" barrel vs. 4.5" for the 17)
shoot 2 inch groups at 25 *yards*

A friend of mine has a Glock 17 and every now and then we get together and have 
a blast...
We set up 5 fullsize man-targets and 3 steel plates at 15 yards and procede to
annihalate them..
I use 2x15shot mags in my '19 and my friend uses 2x17shot mags with 15 rounds
each in his '17. Thats a total of 60 rounds.
First we each shoot down a steel plate, then either moving left to right or
right to left we 'double tap' each target twice, one 'tap in the head, the
other in centre of mass. Thereafter we expend all but two of our remaining
rounds as we please, upon which the first to take out the third plate is the
winner.

Out of 54 rounds fired at both the head and centre of mass of 5 targets we
average 45+ definite 'kills' and the rest all on the target.
This usually takes about 15 seconds to complete (and about 5 minutes looking
for brass)

So much about needing a better??????? pistol than a Glock to hit anything
beyond 10 feet...

READ THE SIG FILE!
_______________________________________________________________________________
Gary Glen-Young     'The token South African'   
E-mail:glngar01@uctvax.uct.ac.za
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 God made men BIG & small, then Samuel Colt made them all equal...
 Now Gaston Glock has made some of us more equal than others.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns