HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: shaffer@achilles.ctd.anl.gov (Michael A. Shaffer)
Subject: Re: (In)sanity arrives to this group! Welcome back Susan!
Organization: Argonne National Laboratory
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 17:50:29 GMT

>>				Why not take a look at rec.guns?  You'll find
>>many of the same  people discussing when lethal force is justified, and
>>when it's not, as well as alternatives.  I should probably warn you,
>>though, it's a moderated group.  Unless your postings have some relevant
>>content, you likely won't be able to post there.
>
>	Perhaps thats the problem.  Because it is moderated, by I presume
>a pro-gun person (who else would take the job on) that people questioning
>whether or not all the other alternatives have been explored aren't going
>to get a real look in there, now are they?

WRONG! I participate in several firearms related mailing lists and
news groups. These are moderated by pro 2nd amendment types but there
are frequent discussions of when it is appropriate to use lethal force.
The post are overwelmingly in favor of its use as a last resort. There
are two opinoins however that I have never seen on these groups.

1. Lethal force should be used for every confrontation.
2. Lethal force should be used for no confrintation.

Both extremes are ridiculous.

				mike
From: ucla-cs!netcon.smc.edu!agood@CS.UCLA.EDU (Aaron Good)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: <<< To Carry or not to Carry... >>>
Date: 7 Apr 92 22:31:07 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.guns
Organization: Santa Monica College, Santa Monica, CA

In article <52682@mimsy.umd.edu> uswnvg!rchrist@uunet.UU.NET (Ron Christian) writes:
#
#
#All concealed carry gives you is a better chance.  A sniper can still
#take you out, or someone more prepared than you can get you first, or a
#sufficient number of assailants can take you down.  All a firearm and
#appropriate training does is improve your chances.  The more effective
#the firearm, and the better the training, the better chances you have.
#
#Concealed carry is like wearing a seatbelt.  It doesn't help in some
#cases, and it might even hinder in a very few, but on the average it
#increases your chances of keeping yourself and your loved ones alive.
Hear Hear, Bravo, encore , well said, well done



Newsgroups: 1,talk.politics.guns,fido.rtkba
From: robinson@ac.dal.ca
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: On the use of the term "assault rifle"
Date: 16 Apr 92 12:29:52 GMT
Organization: Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

In article <74018@netnews.upenn.edu>, yee@mipgsun.mipg.upenn.edu (Conway Yee) writes:
> 
> As we all know, those who are in favor of gun control have coined the
> term "assault rifle" (or is it "assault weapon", I can't remember
> which is the invented term).  This term is applied to "ugly" rifles.
> Lately there has been a tendency to expand this term even further to
> "assault pistol".  The idea is to separate "good" guns from "bad"
> guns.  This way, support can be raised for banning salami style.  The
> term "assault" now has very negative connotations.  I propose to turn
> this around.  Remember, during the American Revolutionary War, the
> British soldiers used the term "Yankee Doodle" in a derogatory manner.
> The colonists responded by making the term their own (and changing the
> connotation).  Similarly the homosexual community is taking on the
> term "queer" by using the name "The Queer Nation".
> 
> I own an HP48SX calculator.  I have taken to calling it an "assault
> calculator" and saying that it is "the preferred weapon by engineers".
> This points out the ridiculous nature of the term "assault
> rifle/pistol".  Almost anything that pro-gun controllers want to ban
> can be called an "assault X" or "X is the preferred weapon by Y".
> 
> Comments?  Critiques?

In the motorcycle arena, where there have been attempts to blacklist 
certain bikes by insurance companies because of their looks and designs, 
people have taken to calling them assault bikes.  When the bike's name is 
Ninja, this works out rather well. :-)

The bikes they've been trying to eliminate are the street legal racing 
style machines.  Like assault rifles, these usually contain the most 
advanced technologies (high-tech plastics, metals etc) and are usually at 
the high end of the performance spectrum (they accelerate very well, brake 
very well, swerve very well, corner very well etc).  Because of a few cases 
where they've been misused, the insurance industry has tried refusing to 
insure drivers who own them, even when the person in question has a 
spotless driving record.  In short, they are basing their decision not on 
the driver, but on the vehicle.  Thus the situation is very similar to the 
assualt rifle 'problem'.

Next month, the new Kenmore Assualt Toaster.  Comming soon to a Sears near 
you. :-)

> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Blockley Hall, 4th floor|                    Conway Yee, N2JWQ
> 418 Service Drive       |yee@ming.mipg.upenn.edu    (preferred)
> Philadelphia, PA 19104  |cy5@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (forwarded to above)
> (215) 662-6780          |yee@bnlx26.nsls.bnl.gov    (rarely checked)
-- 
John Robinson                  Only criminals, tyrants, and cowards have
robinson@ac.dal.ca                 reason to fear the armed, honest citizen.
DOD #0069
From: db@matilda.vut.edu.au (David Bowman )
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Salmon Rushdie's insight into America
Date: 7 Apr 92 03:22:05 GMT
Reply-To: db@matilda.vut.edu.au (David Bowman )
Organization: Victoria University of Technology, Melb, Australia

In article <1992Apr6.064206.3672@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu> wwarf@copper.ucs.indiana.edu (wayne john warf) writes:
>In article <1992Apr6.053750.22925@matilda.vut.edu.au> db@matilda.vut.edu.au (David Bowman ) writes:

>>>>Re Salmon Rushdie,
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>And when that Hezbollahi comes walking through the door, in the seconds before
>>>>>Rushdie gets his brains blown out, I'm sure that he'll reflect on how fortunate
>>>>>he is to live in a country where he didn't have the means to defend himself.
>>>>>
>>>>You are a bit behind the times, aren't you. Salmon Rushdie is guarded
>>>>24 hours a day by experts. His country pays for this service.
>>>>He is indeed fortunate to live in England.
>>>
>>>Well, fantastic, everyone in England has their own bodyguard. Why didn't
>>>we think of that?
>>>
>>Who said that everyone in England has a bodyguard? Do you think
>>that the police should just ignore the threats against SR? Or
>>do you think he should be left to defend himself?
>>
>Nooooo, I just can't understand why he simply doesn't run away when
>someone threatens him instead of relying on men with *gasp* GUNS.
>He could rely on non-violence, you know, but I guess he just doesn't
>want to reason instead of force. I can't see how a situation like his
>could come about in an enlightened, civilized country like England

I really suggest you do some reading. Salmon Rushdie's life is
endangered due to fanatics from Iran. Nothing to do with England.

-- 
   "Leave our flies alone, you Pommy bastard!"
    Spectator at a Test match in the 1930s when an English cricketer
    was swatting at flies.
Newsgroups: 1,talk.politics.guns,fido.rtkba
From: dennis@bluemoon.rn.com (Dennis Carney)
Subject: PROponent March 1992 -- Article "APRIL (Firearms Safety Classes)"
Organization: Blue Moon BBS ((614) 868-998[024])
Date: Mon, 06 Apr 92 01:10:53 EDT

The following article is from the March 1992 issue of the PROponent,
the monthly newsletter published by The Peoples Rights Organization
(PRO), a pro gun, pro constitutional rights group based in Columbus,
Ohio.

As a member of the PRO -- Electronic Information Committee,
I am posting this article for information only. Questions or
comments may be directed to:

PEOPLES RIGHTS ORGANIZATION
5 E. Long St., Suite 412
Columbus, OH 43215
(614) 268-0122

---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------

(Begin article "APRIL" from March 1992 PROponent)

 
APRIL...

     On April 28, and 30, 1992, PRO NRA Firearm instructors will
give their first class on basic firearm safety.  These classes will
be given at the League of Ohio Sportsmen's building on Indianola
Ave., just south of Cook Road.  Classes will begin at 7:00pm on
Tuesday and Thursday.  Each class lasts four hours and will be
broken up into two, two hour classes.
     The NRA Basic Firearm Safety Classes entail hands-on firearm
instruction.  You will learn how to tell if a firearm is loaded, is
there one in the chamber, how to point it in a safe direction, how
to store it safely and many other important facts about the safe
handling of firearms.
     Classes cost $10.00 and refreshments will be provided.  The
cost of classes include an informative book published by the NRA,
test materials, and a certificate indicating the student has
attended this class on the principals of basic firearm safety.
     These classes do not involve the actual firing of any
firearms, though you will be able to have "hands-on" experience
with each type of firearm.  There will be an example of a
double-action and single-action revolver; pump, hinge and
semi-automatic shotgun; bolt-action and semi-automatic rifle; black
powder firearms and lever-action rifles.
     There will be no LIVE ammunition at these classes.  You will
not need to bring a firearm to the class as instructors will
provide their own firearms for these classes.
     If you wish to sign-up for this class, or wish more
information, please call:

               Pat Johnson
               614-294-8945

     Since the inception of PRO, one of our goals was to establish
firearm safety classes affordable to the general public, so that
they could be given the opportunity to learn the correct and safe
way to handle firearms.  The editors of the PROponent wish to
extend to all those who underwent the intensive NRA training to
become instructors a heartfelt thank you for their commitment and
dedication.

 
(End article "APRIL" from March 1992 PROponent)

This is from:
    dennis@bluemoon.rn.com
---- The Soviet Union Died, But the Communists Live On ----
From: db@matilda.vut.edu.au (David Bowman )
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Fire fighters and whatifs  (Was Re: Sanity arrives ...)
Date: 7 Apr 92 03:18:48 GMT
Reply-To: db@matilda.vut.edu.au (David Bowman )
Organization: Victoria University of Technology, Melb, Australia

In article <1992Apr6.104946.15968@cbnewsl.cb.att.com> rlt@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (R.L.Taylor KB2OOA) writes:
>In article <1992Apr3.233526.8883@matilda.vut.edu.au> db@matilda.vut.edu.au (David Bowman ) writes:
>>>P.S. Or perhaps the Fire Departments in Australia have practices
>>>resembling my city Fire Department - and also waste their time
>>>on "Henry-type hypotheticals" and "whatifs"?
>
>>Well Henry my old mate, you make a good point. We have fire departments
>>to worry about what ifs. We don't expect each citizen to own a fire truck and
>>firefighting equipment. In much the same way we have police to worry about
>>what ifs on the criminal front.... your analogy does not help your case.
>
>Gee, we have a fire department in my town, too.  But I still have smoke
>detectors in my house, and fire extinguishers in my kitchen and my car.
>To do otherwise would be pretty stupid, IMO.  Fire department response

You must have a miserable life, worrying all the
time about what can go wrong. I would get such equipment if
I lived in the bush, but in the inner city, no way!

>time (like police response time) can be several minutes...longer if they're
>already busy with another fire (crime).  Guess I should just let my house
>burn down while I wait?

No. I suggest you do something about the services your
country provides.
-- 
   "Leave our flies alone, you Pommy bastard!"
    Spectator at a Test match in the 1930s when an English cricketer
    was swatting at flies.
From: cmort@NCoast.ORG (Christopher Morton)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Salmon (sic) Rushdie's insight into America
Date: 16 Apr 92 13:42:36 GMT
Article-I.D.: NCoast.1992Apr16.134236.5233
Reply-To: cmort@ncoast.org (Christopher Morton)
Followup-To: talk.politics.guns
Organization: North Coast Public Access *NIX, Cleveland, OH

As quoted from <1992Apr14.042632.16392@matilda.vut.edu.au> by db@matilda.vut.edu.au (David Bowman ):

> In article <1992Apr13.220728.19382@NCoast.ORG> cmort@ncoast.org (Christopher Morton) writes:
> >> 
> >> Henry, I am astounded! I thought you would have some understanding of 
> >> this case. Rushdie is under a death sentence. There is a price on his
> >> head. He is in known danger because some people find a novel he wrote,
> >> offensive. He is in a different category that the rest of us.
> >> If you can't see this, I pity you.
> >
> >So he has a greater right to life than somebody else ONLY because he pissed off
> >the Ayatollah Khomeini?  Mind you, there's nothing WRONG with pissing off
> 
> Now who said that? Nobody. Again you are making things up because
> you know you have not a leg to stand on.

I don't have to make things up.  I only have to use your and "Susan's" words.
Obviously there's SOME monumental difference between Rushde and somebody else
whose life is in danger.  We STILL don't know what it is.

> >Iranian fundamentalists, but you don't make a case that that gives you a       
> >greater claim on protection than someone who merely calls the police to report
> >a drug house next door.  Obviously, you don't have a clue here.
> 
> I think that someone calling the police to
> report a drug house next door, has less to fear than Rushdie in his present
> position. The UK police also think this. You don't...but
> you think a lot of weird things, don't you Christopher.

Then you display an appalling ignorance regarding the drug trade.  People have
been killed and will continue to be killed for local efforts to fight the
drug trade in this country and in Columbia for that matter.  Of course they
obviously haven't been "touched by god" or whatever it is that sets Rushde
apart.  Oh, I forgot, now I know why he deserves to live and they deserve to
die.  Rushde condemned the U.S.  That DOES make a world of difference, DOESN'T
it?

By the way, why don't you take me up on my suggestion and ask the members of
soc.culture.motss whether they should "pity" their assailants and be murdered
rather than resist?  Not AFRAID, are you?

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------  

"Well whose opinions did you THINK these were...?" 
------------------------------------------------------------------
From: malloy@NPRDC.NAVY.MIL (Sean Malloy)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Fire fighters and whatifs  (Was Re: Sanity arrives ...)
Date: 6 Apr 92 21:13:14 GMT
Organization: Navy Personnel R&D Center, San Diego

In article <1992Apr3.233526.8883@matilda.vut.edu.au> db@matilda.vut.edu.au writes:
>Well Henry my old mate, you make a good point. We have fire departments
>to worry about what ifs. We don't expect each citizen to own a fire truck and
>firefighting equipment. In much the same way we have police to worry about
>what ifs on the criminal front.... your analogy does not help your case.

But does your government encourage or discourage each household to buy
and keep their own fire extinguishers around the house or in their
car, against the 'what if' of a fire starting that they are able to
put out by themselves? Are you claiming that the best response to a
grease fire on your stove is for you to run off and call the fire
department, then run out of your house and let it burn until the fire
crew shows up?

A house fire is going to burn for a long time; the fire crews show up
to prevent it from spreading to nearby houses as much as they do to
put it out. An assault or robbery happens quickly; it's usually over
by the time the police can arrive. At least in the US, the government
encourages citizens as a matter of common sense to purchase fire
extinguishers -- and more is better -- in order to defend themselves
and their property against fire before the fire department can arrive.
The same common sense applies to purchasing firearms in order to
defend yourself and your property against criminals before the police
can arrive, but the government is apparently scared of what might
happen if its citizens accepted the responsibility for their own
protection -- they might decide that they don't need a huge,
economy-strangling bureaucracy, and put lots of government officials
out of work.

-- 
random sig #70:
Sean Malloy                                  | Life would be much easier if we
Navy Personnel Research & Development Center | could just look at the source
San Diego, CA 92152-6800                     | code.
malloy@nprdc.navy.mil                        | 
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: wwarf@copper.ucs.indiana.edu (wayne john warf)
Subject: Watch out for this!
Keywords: HCI Propoganda NEH
Organization: Indiana University, Bloomington IN.
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 11:31:48 -0500

Our local gun club recently discovered something here that I think 
pro-RKBA types should be on the lookout for elsewhere. A local
county building in which our police and sheriff offices plus 
some courtrooms and county offices are housed had a display in its
lobby. The display was obstensibly in celebration of the bicentennial
of the Constitution and Bill of Rights and consisted of a series of
posters. The posters were copyrighted by an organization called 
"Pennsylvania Humanities Council" and consisted of commentary on
various aspects of the Constitution. Most contained errors,
misconceptions or blatant falsehoods of one kind or another.

The poster on the 2nd Amendment, of course, was the most offensive,
in fact, it appeared that they went out of their way to be offensive.
The poster contained a silhouette of a National Guardsman, imposed
on top of this were several paragraphs of text, which, in brief,
stated:

	The 2nd Amendment was intended to protect the states right
	to maintain militias;

	the National Guard is the modern version of a state militia
	and is the only organization protected by the 2nd Amendment;

	the Founding Fathers never intended for privated citizens to
	own their personal arms.

It also contained other captioned photos.

A photo of rows of rifles in a gunshop stating, "Automatic weapons are
easily available over-the-counter at any gunshop."

A photo showed two teenagers, apparently gang members, with one shoving
a stainless Smith&Wesson autoloading pistol in his coat captioned, 
"Easy access to handguns is responsible for 22,000 deaths a year."

A photo showed shotguns pointing skyward from a duck blind, captioned,
"Only hunting and target shooting are legitimate reasons to be
allowed to own firearms."

A photo showed Morton Grove, IL captioned, "some towns and cities 
have made the sale of handguns illegal in order to reduce crime."

Now, I don't know about you, but we were outraged. We made it known to
our county commissioners and the display was removed. We also did a
little more checking. It seems that the "Pennsylvania Humanities
Commission" is funded by the "National Endowment for the Humanities"
so HCI propoganda is being directly funded and distributed by the
government. The "Pennsylvania Humanities Commission" apparently
lists itself as chaired by former PA. Governor and former U.S.
Attorney General Dick Thornburgh, a supposed friend to the RKBA.

These posters are being hawked to schools, libraries, and government
buildings across the country. What can we do to nip this propaganda
distribution in the bud before it's distributed nationwide?
-- 
 *  WWARF@ucs.indiana.edu**I speak for me,OK?**sic semper tyrannis    *
 *   NRA LIFE* *NRA Certified Instructor* *Penna. R&PA* *Ind. SR&PA   *
 * Department of Decision & Information Systems, Indiana University   *
 * Bloomington, IN 47405 USA* *Pennsylvania CCW Lic.*Indiana CCW Lic. *
From: lairdkb@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Kyler Laird)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: NRA billboards
Date: 10 Apr 92 19:55:04 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center

My family's farm has a few billboards along I-65 between Indy and Chicago.

I've spent a few hours thinking of catchy signs I could make.  (Can't
recall most of them.)  Now if I could just make that huge color ink-jet
printer...

Experts Agree: Gun Control Works [pictures of Hitler, ..., local politician]
Your Tax Dollars at Work [picture of no-knock entry of masked police into home]
Armed Citizens are a Threat to the State [King video frame]
Give up your gun, just use 9-1-1 [picture of woman being raped, phone off-hook]

--kyler
From: db@matilda.vut.edu.au (David Bowman )
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Salmon Rushdie's insight into America
Date: 6 Apr 92 05:37:50 GMT
Reply-To: db@matilda.vut.edu.au (David Bowman )
Organization: Victoria University of Technology, Melb, Australia

In article <1992Apr3.015331.11844@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu> wwarf@copper.ucs.indiana.edu (wayne john warf) writes:
>In article <1992Apr2.054917.17911@matilda.vut.edu.au> db@matilda.vut.edu.au (David Bowman ) writes:
>>In article <1992Mar29.162702.4993@NCoast.ORG> cmort@ncoast.org (Christopher Morton) writes:
>>>As quoted from <1992Mar28.074238.9344@matilda.vut.edu.au> by db@matilda.vut.edu.au (David Bowman ):
>>>
>>Re Salmon Rushdie,
>>
>>>
>>>And when that Hezbollahi comes walking through the door, in the seconds before
>>>Rushdie gets his brains blown out, I'm sure that he'll reflect on how fortunate
>>>he is to live in a country where he didn't have the means to defend himself.
>>>
>>You are a bit behind the times, aren't you. Salmon Rushdie is guarded
>>24 hours a day by experts. His country pays for this service.
>>He is indeed fortunate to live in England.
>
>Well, fantastic, everyone in England has their own bodyguard. Why didn't
>we think of that?
>
Who said that everyone in England has a bodyguard? Do you think
that the police should just ignore the threats against SR? Or
do you think he should be left to defend himself?

-- 
   "Leave our flies alone, you Pommy bastard!"
    Spectator at a Test match in the 1930s when an English cricketer
    was swatting at flies.
From: db@matilda.vut.edu.au (David Bowman )
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: UK court approves use of shotgun
Date: 6 Apr 92 05:40:50 GMT
Reply-To: db@matilda.vut.edu.au (David Bowman )
Organization: Victoria University of Technology, Melb, Australia

In article <2272@isgtec.isgtec.com> robert@isgtec.com (Robert Osborne) writes:
>Susan McDonald writes:
>: Matthew T. Russotto writes:
>: >David Bowman writes:
>: >>The simple answer is, don't fight.
>: 
>: >So Dave, what does he do if someone picks a fight with him?  Just sit
>: >there and get beat up?
>: 
>: 	Ever thought of running away or of perhaps not getting into a fight
>: in the first place?
>
>It's hard to run away when you're being held by the shirt collar.
>It's hard to run away when you're wife can't run quite as fast as you can.
>It's hard to run away when you have small children.
>It's hard to run away when ...
>
>Is a complete lack of imagination a common Austrialian trait?
>
I can think of loads of scenarios where running away is not
possible. I could not equal the champion of whatifs though!
But this thread was about people who were in a position
when they *could* run away. Just face it, you want to be
able to use your gun, otherwise why do you always try to 
say that non-violence will never work?

-- 
   "Leave our flies alone, you Pommy bastard!"
    Spectator at a Test match in the 1930s when an English cricketer
    was swatting at flies.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns