HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dennis@bluemoon.rn.com (Dennis Carney)
Subject: PROponent -- Article "REP BILL SCHUCK SPEAKS TO PRO..."
Organization: Blue Moon BBS ((614) 868-998[024])
Date: Sat, 05 Sep 92 01:19:28 EDT

REP BILL SCHUCK SPEAKS TO PRO...

       State Representative William Schuck Spoke to PRO members at
the July meeting asking for their support for his re-election in
the upcoming campaign.  Most PRO members remember Mr. Schuck as
campaign manager for E.J. Thomas in his unsuccessful run for
Columbus City Council.  However, Mr Schuck has been a stanch
pro-gun legislator in his own right.  Thus, PRO members didn't need
to grill the candidate on his position, but nevertheless he offered
confirmation of his strong pro-Second Amendment stance.
       He also told a number of stories about how politics "really"
works down at the State House.  You know, the petty politics, the
back stabbing and credit grabbing that goes on as "business as
usual".  He is clearly just as disgusted with much of this as you
are.  Asked about the Constitutional Convention, he expressed his
grave concerns for this country unless somehow the deficit is
controlled, but stated that his fears of a convention getting out
of control have led him (as well as the rest of us) to oppose this
approach to budgetary responsibility.  He also exposed some of the
financial chicanery behind our own state's budget problems and the
behind the scenes collusion to impose taxes on those least likely
to be able to fight them.  In all, we found it a very enlightening
insider report on state government.
       If you would like to keep these kinds of inside connections
and pro-gun friends at the State House, contact the PRO PAC
officers (or write the PRO office which will pass your request on
to them) to volunteer to help pro-gun candidates.  You may also
contact the Schuck campaign directly through the Columbus
Republican Party office.

...

This is from:
    dennis@bluemoon.rn.com
---- The Soviet Union Died, But the Communists Live On ----
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary)
Subject: Re: Seattle Buy-Back Update
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 00:19:42 GMT

In article <82472@bcsaic.boeing.com> rwojcik@atc.boeing.com writes:
>The point that Nick makes about getting "press" is important.  As one of the
>"anti's", I feel that such programs serve to dramatize the role of guns in
>our society.  To show that not everyone who owns a gun is happy with it.  For
>some people, the possession of the gun alone was greater than their fear of
>criminals.  Gun possession, for these people, went from the lesser of two evils
>to the greater of two evils. 

This is where "press" breaks down, and "propaganda" begins: Most of the
guns turned in (in similar buy-backs) have been non-functional, or
nearly worthless. They were not turned in, because the owner didn't
want a gun, but because he was able to sell a piece of trash for $50.
The other main contributer to such programs, are widows truning in
their late husband's guns: They aren't making any decision about gun
ownership, they are just getting some money (often much less than a
fair price, though they don't know this), for equipment for a hobby
(target shooting or hunting) that they were never interested in.

                                                   Frank Crary
                                                   CU Boulder
From: jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: ICLU Commission on the 2nd Amendment and Gun Control (Long!)
Date: 8 Sep 92 14:37:12 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.

db@matilda.vut.edu.au (David Bowman ) writes:

>>firearms deaths each year.   Get ready to register the sexual organs of 
>>your preference.  :-)
>>
>I wish Susan was still around. She would have something to
>say about this pathetic attempt at humour!

So what's stopping you from re-inventing her again like you did the last 
time?

Or are you coming out from behind "her" skirt these days?

John

-- 
John De Armond, WD4OQC               |Interested in high performance mobility?  
Performance Engineering Magazine (TM) |
Marietta, Ga                         |Interested in high tech and computers? 
jgd@dixie.com                        |Write me about PE Magazine
Need Usenet public Access in Atlanta?  Write Me for info on Dixie.com.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: PA142548@utkvm1.utk.edu (T. Archer)
Subject: Re: 2nd Amendment Myths
Organization: University of Tennessee Division of Continuing Education
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 16:15:38 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.031300.5214@Princeton.EDU> pswanson@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Paul Swanson) writes:
>Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
>Path: utkux1.utk.edu!utkcs2!gatech!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!linac!att!princeton!phoenix.Princeton.EDU!pswanson
>From: pswanson@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Paul Swanson)
>Subject: Re: 2nd Amendment Myths
>Message-ID: <1992Sep8.031300.5214@Princeton.EDU>
>Originator: news@nimaster
>Sender: news@Princeton.EDU (USENET News System)
>Nntp-Posting-Host: phoenix.princeton.edu
>Organization: Princeton University
>References: <81757@bcsaic.boeing.com> <1992Sep2.171217.25782@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> <1992Sep4.202307.7814@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>
>Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 03:13:00 GMT
>Lines: 15
>Hey, speaking of second amendment, I noticed this quote in the paper the
>other day:
>
>If I were writing the Bill of Rights now, there wouldn't be any such
>thing as the Second Amendment ... This has been subject to one of the
>greatest pieces of fraud - I repeat the word fraud - on the American
>public by special-interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime.
>
>                                 - Former Chief Justice Warren Burger
>
>Here is someone who probably has a good idea about constitutional law
>who apparently thinks the RKBA is a misinterpretation of the Second
>Amendment.
>
>Paul.

Not at all.  Note that he wants the Second Amendment GONE.  If it truly 
DOESN'T protect the RKBA, why get rid of it?  Warren Burger is a liberal 
activist, and the idea of an armed populace makes his skin crawl right off 
his body and go hide under a bed.  

Because RKBA doesn't fit his social agenda, he is opposed to it, and will 
twist any data to support is erronous assertion that the Second does not 
support the RKBA.
-=-=-
T. Archer  PA142548@utkvm1.utk.edu
University of Tennessee
"Vote Dempublican, it's easier than thinking." -- Unknown
-=-=-
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: hunter@quake.sylmar.ca.us (James Collins)
Subject: RKBA files
Organization: Quake Public Access, Sylmar CA
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 21:00:49 GMT

Does anyone have all the rkba files?  All the archive sites i've seen are 
missing some of the files (like 5-7, 9, and 11 and 12).  Thanks in 
advance.


James Collins
hunter@quake.sylmar.ca.us
james.collins%bbs@quake.sylmar.ca.us
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: mcbeeb@atlantis.CS.ORST.EDU (Brian Mcbee)
Subject: Re: STOLEN **'91 TOYOTA 4 RUNNER
Organization: Computer Science Outreach Services - Oregon State University
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 23:54:32 GMT

I suspect no car thief would pull this shit if they suspected their intended
victim was armed.

Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,talk.abortion
From: PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu (David Veal)
Subject: Re: democratic platform
Organization: The University of Tennessee, Knoxville
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 01:49:15 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.002024.17105@rotag.mi.org>
kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:

>
>In article <5848@transfer.stratus.com> cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares) write:
>>In article <1992Aug24.054700.8995@rotag.mi.org>, kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Dary) writes:
>>> >My understanding of the use of the phrase "well-regulated" is
>>> >that we would call it "well-trained" or "smoothly functioning"
>>> >today.
>>>
>>> Which implies some sort of organizational body training and maintaining
>>> them, IMO. Not just any old yahoo who can pull a trigger.
>>
>>Perhaps you're just not reading again.
>>
>>The "well-regulated militia" may not be just any old yahoo who can pull
>>a trigger, but "the people" includes every old yahoo, even fingerless ones.
>>The right is not restricted to the militia, but belongs to the people.
>
>Then what is the purpose and effect of the first clause, pray tell?

     It specifies why the right of the people must not be infringed.  As
to its effect, we must examine the English involved.  If it does not
restrict the second clause, then we must assume it has another function.
Perhaps the second clause protects the owning of arms and the first
protects the right of the militia to assemble for training.

>
>>The right of the people shall not be infringed, in order that there be
>>enough of them around to form a militia when it is needed.
>
>If they're all psychotic survivalist nuts with a paranoid suspicion of
>established government, and armed to the hilt, how the hell are you going
>to round them up to form a militia "when it is needed"?

     In the first place, they all aren't.  In the second, you have calls
on the news for people to report  such and such a place for militia duty.

>Throw them some raw
>meat, perhaps?

     Oh, pardon me.  I mistook you for somebody looking to have an
intelligent debate.

>Sounds like a good case could be made (although I personally
>wouldn't go quite that far) that a universal RKBA contributes to the
>INsecurity of a free state, and is therefore completely incompatible with
>the 2nd Amendment.

     Then make your case.

========================================================================
| David Veal  PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu                                  |
|             University of Tennessee Division of Continuing Education |
========================================================================
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: wolfgang@wsrcc.com (Wolfgang S. Rupprecht)
Subject: Re: STOLEN **'91 TOYOTA 4 RUNNER
Organization: W S Rupprecht Computer Consulting, Fremont CA
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 20:18:11 GMT

Perhaps a real-life crime and guns example will liven this group up a
bit.  Apologies to those that really enjoy debating what the "We" in
"We the people" really means. ;-)

brose@slacvm.slac.stanford.edu writes:
>somebody stole my brother's 4 runner over the weekend.  held him at
>gunpoint and handcuffed him.  am sure the truck is in parts by now.

According to the newspapers there has recently been a drastic jump in
at-gunpoint car thefts.  Usually the thief approaches a person
entering or leaving an expensive car, pulls his gun and requests the
keys.  One claimed reason for this rise in these forceful thefts is
the ever increasing efficiency of car alarms.  Apparently the alarms
are getting to be enough of a pain for the crooks that it is much
easier to force the owner to unlock things for them, than to figure
out how to hot-wire the car.

The question is, what is the best strategy for dealing with this
problem?  I'd be interested in seeing the net's opinions.

-wolfgang
-- 
Wolfgang Rupprecht    wolfgang@wsrcc.com (or) decwrl!wsrcc!wolfgang
Snail Mail:           39469 Gallaudet Drive, Fremont, CA 94538-4511
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,talk.abortion
From: rats@cbnewsc.cb.att.com (Morris the Cat)
Subject: Re: 2nd Amendment Myths
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 17:25:40 GMT


In <82372@bcsaic.boeing.com> Richard Wojcik,snake states:

| I'm sorry, but you seldom make any
|substantive points that could draw any other kind of response.  If you want
|to debate the issues, then address what was said rather than your feelings 
|about the person who said them.  I'm sure that you are quite capable of 
|rational argument if you stop trying to play one-upsmanship with people.  It
|is quite possible to have a conversation on the net without descending into
|the adolescent flame game.

Rick, ole' boy, we went through this all this stuff four years ago, and
I am not going to expend anymore of myself attempting to convince you.

|>You stumbled into one, Rick. Perhaps the corrallary is that the Supreme
|>Court _IS_ interested in the arguments of the anti-RKBA lobby, eh?

|I shudder to think of it, but you may be right.  My position is that the 
|Supremes have a perfect right to uphold your RKBA, but they just don't seem
|interested in it.  The current Court, however, is substantially different
|from previous ones.

How so? It doesn't seem any friendlier to gun owners rights that any
other previous courts.

|If you can't get the RKBA interpretation you want 
|from this one, then you might as well give it up.

RKBA arms activists have long given up on the judiciary as bulwark of
the defense of the second amendment.

RKBA activists know the U.S. Judiciary is the enemy of the RKBA of the
masses.

|If you can, then I really
|will feel compelled to support the repeal of the 2nd.

Thank you, Rick. 

A little honesty never hurt anyone.

Now that have given your views of the importance of the 2nd Amendment,
perhaps you would share with us what new gun laws you would pass,
your reasons for wanting them passed, and any statistical evidence
supporting your position.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.guns:20689 talk.abortion:35657
From: tms@cs.umd.edu (Tom Swiss (not Swift, not Suiss, Swiss!))
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Who's "free-er"? Intrnat'l response wanted!
Date: 14 Sep 92 01:34:39 GMT
Organization: The Reality Liberation Front (pixels to the people!)

n9020351@henson.cc.wwu.edu (James Douglas Del-Vecchio) writes:

>	So vote Libertarian.  That is about the only place where the
>various single interests converge.  There will always be single issue
>groups because most people only have a few things that they are very
>interested in.

     Problem there is you get their loopy (imho) economics, and strong
taste of social Darwinism that doesn't agree with my palate.

     But I'll tell you what. If the L's are serious enough to get on
the ballot in Maryland, and if Bush is clearly going to lose Maryland,
I'll pull the lever for Marrou/Lord.

===============================================================================
Tom Swiss/tms@flubber.cs.umd.edu| "Born to die" | Keep your laws off my brain!
     "What's so funny 'bout peace, love and understanding?" - Nick Lowe 
          This is a .signature antibody. Vaccinate your .sig!
                 "I want to be Robin to Bush's Batman."
                  -- Vice President Dan Quayle
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: osan@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (Mr. X)
Subject: Re: Seattle Buy-Back Update
Organization: Twilight Zone
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 20:52:52 GMT

In article <1992Sep4.161344.29470@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary) writes:

>Also, there was a woman who turned in her son's (in his late 20s, not a kid)
>$1700 rifle, because she didn't approve of the hobby.

	Ohhhhhhhh... this makes me quite queasy ohhhhhhhhhh...
	
	-Andy "the nauseous" V.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: rats@cbnewsc.cb.att.com (Morris the Cat)
Subject: Re: New JPFO Book on Nazi Gun Control Laws
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 19:49:07 GMT


|>Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership is now offering a
|>new book entitled:

|>		"GUN CONTROL" Gateway to Tyranny
|>		The Nazi Weapons Law, 18 March 1938

|>TWO books for $43.85 + $3.95 Shipping

|I hope this is a typo.  If two copies are shipped to the same
|address separately it costs $45.80, this "deal" would cost $47.80.

Sorry, my error. The TOTAL cost including shipping is $43.85; this
includes the shipping cost of $3.95.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: meyers@leonardo.rtp.dg.com (Bill Meyers)
Subject: Re: No Difference Between the Parties?
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 19:01:38 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: N/I

In article <1992Sep2.192620.13443@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> clc5q@hemlock.cs.Virginia.EDU (Clark L. Coleman) writes:
[ ... ]
>My solution is to throw out so many Democratic Senators and Representatives
>that we would have Republican control of both Houses of Congress. I contend
>that there would no longer be any significant pressure to compromise, and that
>we would not get gun control riders on other bills from such a Congress. I
>asked for an example with the conditions I stated above for a very good reason:
>I wanted to see if there were good reasons to think that a Republican Congress
>would have no significant difference on gun control from a Democratic Congress.

Sarah Brady is a Republican.

While a Republican Congress would be better, it wouldn't be good enough.
It's also important to convince the Republican Party to support the RKBA.
Sure, they're a whole lot better than the Democrats -- but they're a whole
lot _worse_ now than only 5 or 10 years ago.  In fact I daresay they're a
whole lot worse now than just 4 years ago -- i.e., since the last election.

So while I will personally continue to spend time and effort on behalf of
_some_ Republican candidates for Congress (and state/local offices), and I
will not actively try to make Bush lose -- by voting for Clinton -- I won't
try to help Bush win, by voting for him, either.  If he does in fact lose,
tough potatoes.  Think of it as a long term investment in good government.
--------
Sen. Terry Sanford, who as Governor of North Carolina refused Police protection
to a Civil Rights march, supports your Right to Keep and Bear Sporting Goods.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary)
Subject: Re: So... Why have a standing military?
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 02:54:43 GMT

In article <1992Sep6.215015.2680@leela.cs.orst.edu> mcbeeb@atlantis.CS.ORST.EDU (Brian Mcbee) writes:
>Hmmmm. It is generally conceded that the United States has the most
>powerful military in the world.  And recent discussions on tpg have 
>convinced me that the US military could NOT conquer the population of
>the US.  Which leads to the conclusion that no other country could
>either.  So the question is:  If the job of the military is to protect
>the polulation of the US against foreign aggression, why bother having
>a standing military at all?

Two reasons mainly: A strong military (for use in foreign wars) is
extremely usefull in diplomacy. I suspect this is the main reason 
most politicians would give.

Second, fighting a modern war is _extermely_ painfull for the country
in which the fighting occurs. While an armed population could defeat
a foreign invader, they would be much better off if they never had to.
A professional army can be used in foreign wars to (hopefully) assure
no wars ever occur on American soil.

                                                   Frank Crary
                                                   CU Boulder
From: donb@igor.tamri.com (Don Baldwin)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Time to Fight
Date: 9 Sep 92 18:52:42 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: TOSHIBA America MRI, South San Francisco, CA

In article <5532@ssc-bee.ssc-vax.boeing.com> simnet@ssc-vax.boeing.com
(Mark R Poulson) writes:
>As Clint Eastwood says in the recently released THE UNFORGIVEN....
>
>	"Deserve has got nothing to do with it"

I thought that the kid said to him that someone "deserved what they got"
and he replied "We ALL deserve it".

Great movie...

    don
Newsgroups: 2,3,talk.politics.guns,fido.rtkba
From: dennis@bluemoon.rn.com (Dennis Carney)
Subject: PROponent -- Article "SECOND ANNUAL SHOOT-OUTING..."
Organization: Blue Moon BBS ((614) 868-998[024])
Date: Sat, 05 Sep 92 01:14:05 EDT

SECOND ANNUAL SHOOT-OUTING...

       Now is the time to start planning on attending the Second
Annual PRO Sporting Clays Shoot.  The date will be October 18 only,
tentatively to be held at the Pheasant Recreation Inc. in
Darbyville, Pickaway County.  Starting time is 10:00am, rain or
shine.
       In addition to the 50 bird sporting clays event, other
sub-events will include still board (turkey shoot) card shoots, and
archery competition.  Entry fees for all events will benefit PRO,
plus a cash jackpot for the sub-events only.  Sub-events cost $2.00
per round, with 50% of the total going to the winners, and 50% to
PRO.  Shells will be provided for the turkey shoot.
       Several prizes will be awarded to sporting clays shooters,
based on their ability and score.  Previous sporting clays
experience is NOT required.  We will have instructors available for
beginners.
       Plan to bring your appetite, as PRO will provide cold pop
and grilled sandwiches.  Come out and support PRO in fighting the
gun-banners.  For more information, or to RSVP, please call me at
work during the day.  My number is: (614) 644-1516.

               Gregory McGinnis
               Fundraiser Shoot Committee

       [For those of you not familiar with a sporting Clays Shoot
or a turkey shoot here are a few explanations.  Sporting Clays are
small round clay discs that are propelled by a mechanical device to
simulate the actual flight of game birds and rabbits.  The turkey
shoot is at small cards only.  There is no actual firing at any
animals in either type of shoot.]
_____________________________________________

       "The American people have three boxes of power: The Ballot
Box, the Jury Box, and lastly, the Cartridge Box."

U.S. Senator Steve Symms (R-ID)
_____________________________________________

...

This is from:
    dennis@bluemoon.rn.com
---- The Soviet Union Died, But the Communists Live On ----
Xref: sparky talk.politics.guns:20819 talk.abortion:36055
From: lib007@marshall.wvnet.edu (Tim Balch)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,talk.abortion
Subject: Re: democratic platform (militia regulation)
Date: 11 Sep 92 15:45:28 GMT
Organization: Marshall University

In article <1992Sep8.014457.17582@rotag.mi.org>, kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin 
Darcy) writes:
>      
> Do you have evidence that states are deliberately blocking the rise of 
> citizen militias?  ....
>

Yes, as a matter of fact, I do:

     West Virginia Code, section 15-1F-7. Unlawful military organizations.
It shall be unlawful for any body of men whatever, other than the regularly
organized national guard or the troops of the United States, to associate
themselves together as a military company or organization in this State ...
[except that public or private schools may get permission from the Governor 
to organize themselves into companies of cadets and be furnished obsolete 
ordnance and equipment not needed by the nat'l guard].  Whoesoever offends 
against the provisions of this section, or belongs to or parades with any 
such unauthorized body of men with arms, shall be punished with a fine of 
not exceeding one hundred dollars or imprisoned for a term not exceeding six
months.   (1897, as amended)

     Kentucky Revised Statutes, chapter 38.440.  Permission required of other
military organizations, or to parade with arms.  (1) No persons other than the
Kentucky national guard or Kentucky active militia shall associate together as
an armed company or drill or parade with arms without permission from the
governor.  (2) Benevolent and social organizations may wear swords, and 
students...[in military science courses] may drill and parade with arms 
in public under the supervision of their instructors.  (1954) 

The only other state code I have ready access to--Ohio--doesn't seem to have an
explicit ban.

Such regulations are clearly within the power of the states to pass; the Second
Amendment has not been explicitly applied to the states through the 14th
Amendment (no Supreme Court rulings), and limitations on association as a
military organization don't directly affect an individual citizen's RKBA. [See
__American Jurisprudence 2d__, Military and Civil Defense, section 46, for a
fuller discussion, with case citations.]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy A. Balch          LIB007@MARSHALL.WVNET.EDU   LIB007@MARSHALL   
Marshall Univ.            voice  (304) 696-2335       fax  (304) 696-5858
   "Knowledge is of two kinds; we know a subject ourselves, or we know where 
   we can find information upon it."   Samuel Johnson
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,talk.abortion