HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: robs@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Robert Sipe)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Alternative RKBA Groups Needed
Date: 12 Nov 92 22:51:56 GMT
Organization: Boeing

In article <1992Nov11.180504.1862@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu> jrm@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu writes:
>Should new pro-RKBA groups, not affiliated with the NRA, be formed and
>supported ?
>
>The NRA has a problem - a piss-poor public image. TV ads featuring a
>few aging movie personalities has not changed that one bit. The NRA
>has another problem - they have become identified as the sole voice
>for the 2nd amendment. This makes it all too easy for groups like
>HCI to demonize them and focus its propaganda campaign against them.
>






Well, there is a very formidable group established in Bellevue, Wa.
called "The Citizens Right to Bear Arms".  They are very influential
with the local politicians in supporting the 2nd ammendment.  Another
group that exists in Washington is the WAC, Wash. Arms Collectors.  It
too is growing very rapidly.  In fact they represent the Washington
gun owners with the NRA.  Ofcourse the NRA is 3 million strong.  These
numbers overshawdow either of these groups.

The NRA needs to take their advertising dollars and hire a marketing
firm that genuinely supports the cause and have them begin coming
up with pitches designed to sell the NRA position.  A good advertising
firm can work wonders however, they can be expensive.



-- 
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: donb@igor.tamri.com (Don Baldwin)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: 2nd Ammendment
Date: 11 Nov 92 01:25:52 GMT
Organization: TOSHIBA America MRI, South San Francisco, CA

In article <1992Nov9.021540.19470@access.usask.ca>
skeeter@skatter.usask.ca writes:
>I would prefer to see laws on people.  Start a "deputy" or "voluntary
>cop" program where any non-felon can go through the police training and then
>carry concealled.  Make sure to publicise the program.  The "bad guys"
>wouldn't know who was carrying and would have to be more careful. 

I keep wishing that some high crime city would try this experiment and
have the crime rate plummet.

     don
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: matwesx@gsusgi2.gsu.edu (William E. Sadler)
Subject: Re: What gun bans might come about under Clinton?
Organization: Georgia State University
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 21:53:18 GMT

kdlin@advtech.uswest.com (David Lin) writes:

>In article <40801@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> ph600fcy@sdcc14.ucsd.edu (Matthew Harrington) writes:
>>People in the newsgroup are talking about the upcoming gun bans.  
>>Has Clinton outright said that he supports bans of "assault" rifles
>>and semi-autos?  How realistic and soon are the gun ban threats?
>>....

>This is a scary topic. Let me make sure that I understand the issue.
>For example, if they ( whoever can be ) decide to ban Colt Sport HBAR
>and/or Beretta 92FS, does it mean:

>(1) We cannot buy them any more.

>or 

>(2) We have to turn them in, if we own them.

>If (2) is the case, are you guys really going to turn them in? Thanks.

Indications are that the answer to this question is no.  Look at what happened
in california when they banned and required owners to turn in.  Estimated at
over 300k guns banned, only 30k turned in.  Owners told govt to shove it.

Which is, in my opinion, the appropriate response.


-- 
/**************************************************************************/
/* William E. Sadler          |       Internet: matwesx@gsusgi2.gsu.edu   */
/* 717 Stephenson Ridge       |               : acmwes@gsusgi2.gsu.edu    */
/* Stone Mountain, GA  30087  |               : 71005.1241@compuserve.com */
/* (404) 413-1957             |            CI$: 71005,1241                */
/*------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
/* Who beat their swords into plowshares, will plow for those who don't   */
/**************************************************************************/
From: m0102@tnc.UUCP (FRANK NEY)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Alternative RKBA Groups Needed
Date: 12 Nov 92 18:36:50 GMT
Reply-To: m0102@tnc.UUCP (FRANK NEY)
Organization: The Next Challenge, Fairfax, Va.


> How about the Libertarian Party of the United States?

Good start.  There are also other RTKBA groups that might wish to join
in, such as Gun Owners of America and the Citizen's Committee for the
Right to Keep and Bear Arms.  There is also (I think) a Citizen's
Committe to Enforce the Second Amendment, but I'm not sure if it is a
seperate entity or an offshoot.

My point is, there are other organizations that support RTKBA.  The
NRA need not be your sole voice.

Frank Ney N4ZHG EMT-A  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
----------------------------------------------------------------
"Whether the authorities be invaders or merely local tyrants, the 
effect of such [gun] laws is to place the individual at the mercy of 
the state, unable to resist."
       - Robert Heinlein, in a 1949 letter concerning "Red Planet"
-- 
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: booth@mdd.comm.mot.com (Greg Booth)
Subject: Re: A thought on the comming gun bans
Keywords: To purchase, or not to purchase....
Organization: Motorola - Mobile Data Division; Richmond, BC
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 16:55:50 GMT

In <1992Nov5.165938.27890@cci632.cci.com> sjo@cci632.cci.com (Steve Owens) writes:


>	I was in the gun shop last night, looking over an assortment
>of EvilBabyKillingCrackCrazedAssaultWeapons, determining which I should 
>buy before the upcomming bans, when a thought occurred to me:  Will the 
>ban be on the purchase of certain firearms, or on the ownership of certain
>firearms?  Think about it:  If I go out and spend $700+ dollars on an
>HBAR, I could be out upwards of $700 (I seriously doubt the government
>is going to give me more than $500 for it.)  If its a purchase ban,

The government gives you money for newly banned firearms?!?!
Speaking as a Canadian where several score firearms and all
"variants thereof" were just banned, driving several 10s of millions
dollars in firearms into the black market, why do you think
a Clinton gov't would compensate you?


-- 
Greg Booth BSc                    |     /_____________________________
BCAA-PCDHF-BCWF-NFA-NRA-IPSC-BCFSS|@====|_____________________________>
Motorola Mobile Data Division     |     \
booth@mdd.comm.mot.com cgb003@email.comm.mot.com
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: kaldis@romulus.rutgers.edu (Theodore A. Kaldis)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Fundamentalist Nightmare
Date: 6 Nov 92 03:44:31 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

In article <1992Nov2.220851.15487@newshub.ariel.yorku.ca> cs922058@ariel.yorku.ca (JEFFREY F HAY) writes:

> [...]  Lemme explain it for you...

> 1) To kill someone with a bullet, you need a gun.  Ok?
> 2) To possess a gun you need to be able to get it somewhere.  OK??

Like the U.S. ...

> 3) Certain types of guns are more suited to killing people.  ie.
     handguns.  The more bullets you can carry, the more people you
     can kill.  This one is pretty simple, eh!

I have carried many bullets with me on occasion, yet I have never
killed anyone.  This one's simpler: guns (or bullets) don't kill
people; people kill people.

> 4) GUNS ARE CONTROLLED IN CANADA!

> This means that it is not easy to get and use a gun in Canada.

It is as easy to get a gun in Canada as it is to drive across the U.S.
border.  I have crossed into Canada numerous times and have NEVER been
searched.  All you have to do is drive across late some weekend
afternoon with all the border-shoppers and have the gun reasonably
well-concealed within the automobile.  Bring along a couple of
newly-purchased jeans back with you, and if you get snagged they'll
find the jeans, fine you or charge you import duty or do whatever it
is they do, and send you on your way.

It is as easy to use a gun in Canada as it is to pull the trigger.
-- 
The views expressed herein are my   ||  Theodore A. Kaldis
my own only.  Do you seriously      ||  kaldis@remus.rutgers.edu
believe that a major university as  ||  {...}!rutgers!remus.rutgers.edu!kaldis
this would hold such views???       ||
From: larryd@stein.u.washington.edu (Larry Desoto)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Need Better NRA Ads NOW !
Date: 5 Nov 92 21:38:04 GMT
Organization: University of Washington

m0102@tnc.UUCP (FRANK NEY) writes:


>Except for the fact that I am more afraid of police officers with
>official sanction than I am of criminals.  I suspect that I am not
>alone in this fear.

[...]

>Nine out of ten police officers I have ever had dealings with are
>responsible, polite, and competent.  This does not appear to be the
>case when you focus attention on the drug-enforcement 'hit-squads.' 
>I'm not sure what I like the least out of the technically illegal
>activities these groups perform, but I do know I despise it all.

The problem is that macho cops with an attitude naturally gravitate to
SWAT teams and DEA hit squads.  If the leadership of the team is not
very careful to keep them out, you wind up with a gang of thugs that
can (and do) abuse their power under the color of law.  Tough luck
to you if you happen to become one of their victims.

It's too bad the good cops get tarred with the same brush.

---
Larry
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy)
Subject: Rep. Foley's Record (Was: 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: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 02:59:57 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.

	Well, let's look at the record. Rep. Foley was a cosponsor
	of the McClure-Volkmer bill of 1986; that's very good. He
	cast pro-freedom votes in the critical period of April,
	1986 when the anti-freedom forces tried to totally gut the
	bill. He also voted for the McCollum amendment in September,
	1988 that substituted a Justice Dept. study for the "Brady"
	7-day wait.

	On the other hand, he missed the vote on the Unsoeld
	amendment in October, 1990; was he ill? 

	Worse yet, Foley voted *for* the Brady Bill and *against* 
	the Staggers amendment in May of 1991.

	He also seems to have missed a vote last year on the so-
	called "crime bill", HR-3371, although I may be wrong
	on this; can someone supply the facts?

	It's difficult for me to see how he could be NRA "A"
	rated, with this record. "B", maybe, but not "A".

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

	Is Foley a friend? He hasn't cast a vote our way since 
	September, 1988 from what I can see. 

	On the other hand, he's still better than Representatives
	Dicks, Miller, or McDermott, all of whom should be NRA
	"F" rated.
From: yarvin@cs.yale.edu (Norman Yarvin)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Registering "Assault Keys"
Date: 12 Nov 1992 20:48:57 -0500
Organization: Yale Computer Science Department
NNTP-Posting-Host: cathy.na.cs.yale.edu

andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman) writes:
|yarvin@cs.yale.edu (Norman Yarvin) writes:
|>I suppose a tank operator _could_ screw up so badly that he would lose to a
|>man hiding in a house, or in some natural fortification.  I mean, there are
|>incorrect ways to use tanks.  In a movie, it may be the military screws up.
|>This is not to be relied upon by anybody in the real world.
|
|  [insults deleted]
|
| [...] the US Army's armor experts
|at Fort Knox.
|  They think that tanks require infantry protection from infantry even
|in the open.  They think that tanks can't be used in cities even with
|infantry protection without rather extreme precautions.  (Basically,
|they have to completely control the population.)
|
|  [more insults deleted]

Thank you for providing an example of the kind of thing I was talking about
when I mentioned "incorrect ways to use tanks".  But what is your point?  If
tanks cannot be used correctly in a given situation, the authorities will
just have one less weapon they can use.  They still will have plenty of other
weapons.

|  Such a discussion will turn on details -- I look forward to
|seeing something that demonstrates that he knows them.

Well, you have had the opportunity all along to provide details of how
somebody could resist the military, or resist a large local police force.
Instead you referred me to some movies.

--
Norman Yarvin						yarvin@cs.yale.edu
From: miles@ms.uky.edu (Stephen D. Grant)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: You can't fast forward through the next four years
Date: 5 Nov 92 05:16:38 GMT
    <Bx78wA.J4q@news.cso.uiuc.edu> <1992Nov4.171905.23975@brtph560.bnr.ca>
Organization: University of Kentucky, USA. -5 GMT

I am an NRA member too. And I did get a letter that in my opinion endorses
Bush (although they didn't officially endorse anybody).
I happen to agree with the letter. And even though I can't stand Bush, I
voted for him. Because he was the only candidate with a chance to win that
wouldn't aggressively go after our Second Amendment Rights.
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...
From: starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Registering "Assault Keys"
Date: 9 Nov 92 10:28:34 GMT
Organization: UDel, School of Life & Health Sciences

In article <1dipe2INN3f3@CATHY.NA.CS.YALE.EDU> yarvin@cs.yale.edu (Norman Yarvin) writes:
}But other than by such means I cannot see any form of government oppression
}emerging which could be remedied by small arms.  I mean, what is a person
}whose house has been wrongly confiscated to do?  Barricade himself inside
}and be shot to death in an exchange of gunfire with the police?  I think not.
}Certainly the press would not report him as the martyr he would actually be.

Fairly plausible fictional accounts of exactly this sort of thing are given
in the movies "Harry's War" and "Stranger on My Land."  There's also a fella
named Rodney King who lives in LA that might not have gotten beaten quite
so badly if armed citizens had been able to calm the cops down a bit.

It's interesting that the example you give of the utility of firearms is that
of the South Vietnamese.  The communists were invading agents of the North
Korean GOVERNMENT, not just any gang, but one with a pseudo-scientific
rationalization for their misconduct which enabled them to guilt-trip enough
US liberals into opposing US intervention (which I may not have favored,
had I been alive at the time) so that they got away with slaughtering more
people after US military forces pulled out than there were fatalities on both
sides while the police action went on.

There's also the case of the Afganistani rebels who successfully repelled
the Soviet Army (including Yeltsin) with the aid of stinger missiles.


Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! - Think Universally, Act Selfishly
starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu

"True greatness consists in the use of a powerful understanding to enlighten
oneself and others." - Voltaire
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: 2nd Ammendment
Date: 6 Nov 92 23:22:38 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Nov5.184232.20993@cbfsb.cb.att.com>, colten@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (marc.colten) writes:

> > Felons may be denied many constitutional rights, including the right
> > to vote.  They often have to petition the governor of the state for
> > the right to vote.  This varies from state to state.
> > 
> 
> I thought the RKBA was an absolute right - how do you lose an absolute
> right just by commiting a crime?

Wow, Marc, you're absolutely right.

In researching this, we also discovered that the right to life and liberty
are absolute rights, too.

So we're opening the prison doors at 5 PM today, and we're busing them
all to your house.
-- 

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: fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary)
Subject: Re: A thought on the comming gun bans
Keywords: To purchase, or not to purchase....
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 03:41:38 GMT

In article <1doob7INNg5k@eagle.natinst.com> chrisb@natinst.com (Chris Bartz) writes:
>I wouldn't count on this.  If they made the guns illegal and said you
>had to get rid of them, they would not be "taken for public use".
>They would be contraband and you would have to dispose of them.

No, that's exactly the logic South Carolina argued: That by banning
development they were not taking the land for public use. "Taking
for public use", at least according to the current Court, _includes_
prohibiting private use. 

>Environmental laws prevent you from building (or whatever) so you
>are being deprived of the use of your land for "public use".  The
>public is using your land to make a cleaner (or at least less dirty)
>environment.

This wasn't a reason for the South Carolina law the Court looked at:
They simply didn't want to deal with future hurricane disasters, so
they banned development of certain, risky costal areas. However
the government wants to use (or leave un-used) the property in 
question, the decisive issue is that the owner is no longer able
to use it.

>When a government zones lands so that they can't have
>certain types of businesses this is not considered taking for
>public use so there is no compensation.

That's debatable, however you can't _sue_ for the damages: Exactly
how much did you loose, as the result of the zoning? When you
sue someone you have to specify excatly the damages done. In cases 
where you _might_ have developed, the losses are uncertain and
beyond the ability of a court to determin exactly. As a result,
courts don't hear this kind of case. In the case of a gun ban, 
the damages are very clear and definite.

>I would be surprised if a gun ban included compensation.

A gun ban without compensation wouldn't supprise me, but the current
Supreme Court sustaining such a ban would.

                                         Frank Crary
                                         CU Boulder
From: hollombe@polymath.tti.com (The Polymath)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Need Better NRA Ads NOW !
Date: 11 Nov 92 02:46:16 GMT
Organization: The Cat Factory

In article <1793@tnc.UUCP> m0102@tnc.UUCP (FRANK NEY) writes:
}
}>KILL file, meet John DeArmond

Frank Ney didn't write that.  I did.

}Except that John does have several valid points.  When you are
}detained to have your stomach pumped by court order because some 'law
}enforcement officer' saw you taking asprin in public, you'll finally
}understand the real world.
}
}I wouldn't laugh, it happened to me two months ago.  Even the ACLU
}told me this is an unwinnable case.  Welcome to Nazi America.

My sympathies.  My point was you're better off having your stomach pumped,
however unjustifiably, than being buried because you pulled a gun in the
face of overwhelming force.  Dead people don't even have the option to
sue, winnable or not.

The Polymath (aka: Jerry Hollombe, M.A., CDP, aka: hollombe@polymath.tti.com)
Head Robot Wrangler at Citicorp
3100 Ocean Park Blvd.   (310) 450-9111, x2483
Santa Monica, CA  90405
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: paull@hplabsz.hpl.hp.com (Robert Paull)
Subject: Re: Alternative RKBA Groups Needed
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 00:42:25 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories Palo Alto,CA
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.4 PL6]



 What about the national organizations: GOA, CCRKBA, SAF.
They are an alternative to the NRA.

(Gun Owners of America)
(Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and bear Arms)
(Second Amendment Foundation)


RP- Member of all of them, including NRA.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: lairdb@crash.cts.com (Laird P. Broadfield)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Alternative RKBA Groups Needed
Date: 12 Nov 92 20:16:27 GMT
Organization: "Well, a head on top, an arm on each side, two legs...."

In <1992Nov11.180504.1862@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu> jrm@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu writes:

>Should new pro-RKBA groups, not affiliated with the NRA, be formed and
>supported ?
[...]
>I am not suggesting disbanding the NRA or greatly reducing its funding.
>What I am suggesting is that a number of different groups, providing
>a number of slightly different points of view, creating somewhat
>different publicity themes has merit. It de-focuses the efforts of HCI
>and offers the public a greater number of pro-RKBA ideas and images.
>The more images one offers, the greater the chance that a person will
>find one that agrees with them. 

I'm not disagreeing with you; not really.  The thing is: there *are* several
existing alternative groups, including some that use money *much* more 
efficiently than does the NRA (one of the reasons I donate to ILA, but not
to NRA.)  GOA and 2AF leap to mind.

The odd thing, though, is exactly what makes (or used to make) NRA so feared
and respected in Washington: they're *HUGE*.  I'd be surprised if GOA and 2AF
together had one one-hundredth the revenue of NRA.  Frankly, I'd like to see
it the other way around, but the lobbying strength of NRA comes from it's
size.  It's something of a positive-feedback loop: the larger the NRA is, 
the more people are aware of it and join it, the larger it gets....  The
same process occurrs in reverse for the smaller groups.


-- 
Laird P. Broadfield     lairdb@crash.cts.com    ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb
Hi!  I'm a shareware signature!  Send $5 if you use me, send $10 for manual!
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns