HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: betz@gozer.idbsu.edu (Andrew Betz)
Subject: Re: The NRA will always be right wing.
Organization: SigSauer Fan Club 
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 21:22:53 GMT

In article <1ikgh3INNp26@flash.pax.tpa.com.au> anon.526@pax.tpa.com.au writes:
>Here is some advice:  Give up.  The NRA will always be right wing.

i'm a member of the NRA and i'm also a libertarian.  i doubt
i'd qualify in anyone's book as a "right winger" (although i
am an extremist - grin).

>I doubt that any NRA directors are losing any sleep over Colorado
>Amendment 2.  Maybe one or two of them have some closeted qualms.

how the NRA directors feel about colorado amendment #2 is not
relevant to their function as an organization working to preserve,
defend, and restore gun rights.

>The other 90 or so (or however many there are) think that fags
>deserve no sympathy.  If you don't believe it, ask Wayne LaPierre
>how many homosexuals there are in the NRA.

homosexuals are welcome in the NRA.

>In case you missed it, the NRA attacked one of its enemies in Colorado
>last year by raising the issue of flag burning.  Guess which side it
>was on.

the flag-burning issue is tripe, but if you can bring down opponents
of gun rights using tripe, then they decided it was worth it.
i was a member of the ACLU for years (in fact, i only recently
decided to *not* renew my membership because of their stance on
gun rights.  in essence, i was a member of the ACLU and the NRA
at the same time.  sure i didn't *always* agree with the ACLU, but
i generally did.  it's the same thing here: i disagree with the
flag-burning position, but i largely agree with the NRA.  that's
why i'm a member). 
>
>It is true that the GOP has been seriously damaged by its reactionary
>posterior.  The NRA is a big part of its problem.  The GOP is either going
>to go down the toilet, or ax the NRA and other fanatics in the party,
>or both.
>
i would agree that the christian coalition, in pressing for further and
further abortion restrictions, is perhaps becoming more of a liability
than an asset.  but the crossover "reagan democrats" voted primarily
on tax issues and the desire for a healthy economy.  the recession is
why bush got UN-elected (remember, most voting americans DID NOT want
slick willie).

>Brought to you by the Society for Preservation of Human Life.
>
brought to you by a member of the NRA.

drew 
--
betz@gozer.idbsu.edu
*** brought into your terminal from the free state of idaho ***
"Now I am become death, destroyer of worlds." - Oppenheimer

Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: lvc@cbnews.cb.att.com (Larry Cipriani)
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
Organization: Ideology Busters, Inc.
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 17:54:13 GMT

In article <9301061637.45@rmkhome.UUCP> rmkhome!rmk@merk.com (Rick Kelly) writes:
>In article <PA146008.601.726336489@utkvm1.utk.edu> PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu (David Veal) writes:
>>       "Have to," is an interesting way to phrase things.  First, if the 
>>state governments *are* releasing murderers and robbers on a whim, with no 
>>thought as to whether they're a danger (or even completed their sentence, 
>>which most don't) explain to me why *I* should be put at an inconvenience 
>>and danger for it?
>
>So you're advocating that all people with the money in hand should be 
>able to buy guns?

This is pretty close to what I would advocate the law be changed to.
It's none of the gov't damn business as to who owns firearms.  We
shouldn't even have dealer licensing or serial numbered guns in my
opinion.

Do you worry about felons having knives or baseball bats ?  Do you
advocate that all people with the money in hand should be able to buy
knives or baseball bats ?  If so, this seems inconsistent with what
you think about guns.  If not, where do you draw the line ?

>That's right.  I'm a criminal.

We agree so far ;-)

>I steal your wallet and use your SS number and other pertinent
>information to make myself an identity that will allow me to pass
>the spot check.  The spot check is now worthless.

You catch on fast.  Any legislation which does not address the fact that
guns are available on the black market and that's where most criminals get
their guns is going to be ineffectual at reducing criminal use and
ownership of guns.  How do you suggest the black market in guns be
eliminated ?  It's been tried with booze and alcohol.  It didn't work in
either case.  Why are guns any different ?
-- 
Larry Cipriani, att!cbvox1!lvc or lvc@cbvox1.att.com
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: smpod@ariel.lerc.nasa.gov (Stefan)
Subject: Re: Coal. to Stop Gun viol.sent me a SURVEY/PETITION
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: who knows
Date: 11 Jan 1993 13:14 EST  

<1intlgINN3r7@werple.apana.org.au>, speednut@werple.apana.org.au (Mark Jose) writes...
> ...
>2. English tend to use bottles of petrol and flaming rags! :-)

Or hordes of soccer fans :-)
From: viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson)
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 07:30:19 GMT

In <C0E219.G9u@SSD.intel.com> hays@ssd.intel.com (Kirk Hays) writes:

>I find this personally amusing.  I grew up in Arizona several decades ago, in
>several different rural areas, and we kids brought (*gasp*) guns to school,
>regularly.

>In the 5th grade, in particular, I had a teacher who loved hunting doves.  In
>season, the boys and girls in his class would bring in our personal shotguns,
>most of us riding on the school buses, and go dove hunting before class in the
>millet fields across the road from the school.

>I stopped by, eight years ago, just for old times, and they're still doing it.

>You'll excuse me, I hope, if I don't broadcast the school's name - I'd hate to
>sic the liberal education establishment on them.

	Screw it!  It's -12 degrees freaking F right now, I'm tired of a
sheriff's office that thinks I need a reason for a CCW (if I had a reason
for the CCW they liked, they'd ask me to accept protective custody!), and
above all I'll be having a new Harley-Davidson sit in my living room for
three months before the roads are clear enough to ride!

	Where is this place, Andy?  I'm thinking seriously about moving.

< 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.  >
<  "Are you *SURE* he's worth a Harley-Davidson?" -- my grandmother  >
< to my girlfriend, about me.  "I'd better not say" -- my girlfriend >
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: ARCHER@utkvm1.utk.edu (T. Archer)
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
Organization: University of Tennessee 
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 16:50:10 GMT

In article <9301051937.44@rmkhome.UUCP> rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:
>Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
>Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
>Path: utkux1.utk.edu!cs.utk.edu!darwin.sura.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!saimiri.primate.wisc.edu!ames!agate!linus!alliant!merk!rmkhome!rmk
>From: rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly)
>Organization: The Man With Ten Cats
>Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 00:37:43 GMT
>Reply-To: rmkhome!rmk@merk.com (Rick Kelly)
>Message-ID: <9301051937.44@rmkhome.UUCP>
>References: <1992Dec31.194342.14590@henson.cc.wwu.edu> <9301021331.43@rmkhome.UUCP> <pa142548.602.726243954@utkvm1.utk.edu>
>Lines: 21
>In article <pa142548.602.726243954@utkvm1.utk.edu> pa142548@utkvm1.utk.edu (T. Archer) writes:
>>In article <9301021331.43@rmkhome.UUCP> rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:
>>>So there seems to be little information on what would happen if everyone
>>>in California over the age of 18 was issued a gun.
>>>
>>>I believe that it would be a catastrophe.
>>
>>First, no one is talking about issuing call adult Californians a firearm.
>>
>>Second, you believe wrongly.  The only change would be a dramatic increase 
>>in good manners and a decrease in police harassment.
>
>
>I wonder how this would be treated in the workplace.  I suspect that
>companies would be able to ban guns from the premises.  So you leave
>your gun out in your car for the crooks.

Your gun maybe.  Mine would be concealed, and unless my employer cares to 
search me on a daily basis, and get sued, mine would not.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Vote Dempublican, it's easier than thinking.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: n9020351@henson.cc.wwu.edu (James Douglas Del-Vecchio)
Subject: Re: 2nd Ammendment Foundation and CCRKBA problem
Organization: Western Washington University
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 06:47:01 GMT

stecher@atlas.socsci.umn.edu (Jack Stecher) writes:

>Could you, and anyone else out there on tpg with a similar story, let
>us know what happens as a result of your letter?  It will help me decide
>whether my money should go to these clowns if I can determine whether they're
>incompetent boobs (in which case, oddly enough, they deserve my money)
>or if they're charlatans.  Come to think of it, I've taken it on faith


	They have been pulling this kind of nonsense on me for years.
I keep getting letters asking me to pay my "dues", though I never joined.
I've also gotten requests to make good my "pledge", though I never
made one.  I've called and they say "yes sir, it must be a mistake",
but it never changes anything.
	The funny thing is that all these letters are addressed to
"Jane Del Vecchio", who does not exist.  It started after I signed
in at a gun show in Puyallup.   No more signing, I guess, at least
not with my address.
	If they are doing something good, good for them, but in 
my house they are known as the dupes who keep asking for money
in this dishonest way.

James Del Vecchio
From: ARCHER@utkvm1.utk.edu (T. Archer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: The Right to be Defended (Was Re: Dressed for Rape)
Date: 11 Jan 93 20:56:56 GMT
Organization: University of Tennessee

In article <9301101255.09@rmkhome.UUCP> rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:
>>       I hate to burst your bubble, but there are states in this Union
>>which allow just that.
>
>Which states allow purchase of a handgun without _any_ paperwork changing
>hands, or the identity of the purchaser being noted?

That is correct.  Private gun sales in Tennessee are unregulated.

>Except, I have yet to see anyone say that they live in a state where
>anyone who has the money can buy a hand gun.

How's this:  "If I want to buy a gun from my buddy David, or I find and ad 
in the want ads, I can tote the money to the address, and pick up the gun."

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Vote Dempublican, it's easier than thinking.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: cbl@uihepa.hep.uiuc.edu (Chris Luchini)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: The NRA will always be right wing.
Date: 8 Jan 93 22:12:09 GMT
Reply-To: cbl@uihepa.hep.uiuc.edu
Organization: High Energy Physics, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign

In article <1ikgh3INNp26@flash.pax.tpa.com.au>, anon.526@pax.tpa.com.au writes:
>
>Don Baldwin laments that the gun lobby is weighed down with the label
>of hard-core conservative.
>
>Here is some advice:  Give up.  The NRA will always be right wing.
>I doubt that any NRA directors are losing any sleep over Colorado
>Amendment 2.  Maybe one or two of them have some closeted qualms.
>The other 90 or so (or however many there are) think that fags
>deserve no sympathy.  If you don't believe it, ask Wayne LaPierre
>how many homosexuals there are in the NRA.


	Every NRA member I know in CO voted against it.
	
	One very common tactic at the grass roots level is to	
	attack what ever can be attacked: I know of at least one
	situation where the gun-grabber was defeted by publicizing
	her homophobic views.

	As for asking Wayne LaPierre that question, what's the point?
	How the hell should he know? Are you claiming that he is
	a homophobe? Please back that contention up, if the question
	you post was not retorical.

>
>In case you missed it, the NRA attacked one of its enemies in Colorado
>last year by raising the issue of flag burning.  Guess which side it
>was on.
>
	That was a mistake, and the letters in the magazine went
	on for pages lambasting the NRA for taking an official stand
	on the subject. 


>It is true that the GOP has been seriously damaged by its reactionary
>posterior.  The NRA is a big part of its problem.  The GOP is either going
             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

	I've _never_ seen that claim in any analysis of the GOP's 
	problem. The religious right, etc, yes, the NRA , no.

>to go down the toilet, or ax the NRA and other fanatics in the party,
>or both.
>


	I don't know why I bother responding, you're just an anonymous
	net.bomb thrower. sigh
*1110 W. Green/Urbana IL 61801/217-333-0505/cbl@uihepa.hep.uiuc.edu 
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: amirza@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Anmar Caves)
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 17:19:33 GMT

In article <9301052244.31@rmkhome.UUCP> rmkhome!rmk@merk.com (Rick Kelly) writes:
>
>Except in Kennesaw(spelling?), Georgia.  But I do believe strongly in
>home defense, although I believe that the best home defense weapon is
>a shotgun.

So, since *you* believe in home defense, it's ok then?  You'll be
suprised at the number of people who will tell you you have no right
to defend yourself, even in your own home.  But, in your mind, defense
at home is ok, but we shouldn't defend ourselves in public?  Whatcha
gonna do, hope you can outrun the assailant and get home to get your
shotgun?


>Hmm.  Someone else said that it was against the law for civilians to
>carry guns in Tennessee.

Just concealed.  Indiana has concealed carry permit system, and quite
a lot of people do carry, and we have a very low rate of violent crime
(except up in the corner of the state near Chicago.  Could this mean
that availablility of guns has nothing to do with violence???

>
>So you're saying that a lot of people just carry concealed weapons,
>no matter what the laws say?

Yes.  An estimated 5%, but such numbers are very tricky to come by
since most people don't flaunt the fact they break the law.  Even in
places where concealed carry is permissible it's hard to gather data
because most people simply won't give away vital parts of their
defense plan.

Once again, I ask, do you have a point?
-- 
Anmar Mirza   # Chief of Tranquility  #My Opinions! NotIU's!#Purveyor of
EMT-D         # Base, Lawrence Co. IN # Legalize Explosives!#nontraditional
N9ISY (tech)  # Somewhere out on the  # Politicians prefer  #family values
Networks Tech.# Mirza Ranch.C'mon over# unarmed peasants.   #Space For Rent
From: rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: A new solution! (Was: Re: Dressed for Rape)
Date: 6 Jan 93 21:41:48 GMT
Reply-To: rmkhome!rmk@merk.com (Rick Kelly)
Organization: The Man With Ten Cats

In article <1993Jan6.163135.1374@ncsu.edu> hes@unity.ncsu.edu (Henry E. Schaffer) writes:
>In article <1id5uoINNm8l@transfer.stratus.com> cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares) writes:
>> ...
>>Yeah, the Middlesex News -- home of Tom Moroney, that paragon of
>>impartiality who wrote that "If Wayne Lo had been forced to go out 
>>of state to buy his SKS, he might have gotten lost, found God, or 
>>just never come back."  Say, THERE'S a good justification for another 
>>gun-control law in Massachusetts.
>> ...
>
>  I think you've got it!  Mass. should have a law that *every*
>applicant for the FID (or whatever you call it) must first drive
>to Montana and back, stopping in at least 3 houses of worship
>on the way.
>
>  Remember that "if it might save even one life ..." it would be
>worth it!

Wayne Lo didn't have an FID.  He was able to buy a gun in Mass under an
act of law that allows "hospitality" to out of state visitors.

And it is extremely easy to get an FID ( allows purchase of long guns and
ammo ) unless you live in Boston.

-- 

Rick Kelly    rmkhome!rmk@merk.com    merk!rmkhome!rmk    rmk@frog.UUCP
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: wwarf@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Wayne J. Warf)
Subject: Re: The homophobia question comes to a stopping point
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 19:48:12 GMT

In article <C0r9t8.JvA@SSD.intel.com> hays@ssd.intel.com (Kirk Hays) writes:
>In article <8110306@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM>, post@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (David Post) writes:
>
>|> Or for $25 they can join the NRA and send a letter to the president
>|> explaining that they are gay, does it make a difference.  And wait for a
>|> response.
>
>Gay, straight, bi-, mono-, non-, or multi-sexual (apologies to anyone feeling
>left out...), I can lower the cost of a one year membership by 40% for new
>members - send email if interested.
>

$25, $15, or $0: Mr. Anonymous has demonstrated that he's only 
interested in asserting his prejudices about the NRA and 
demonizing the organization and its membership for official
stances that exist only in his imagination. He won't even put
his name where his mouth is, let alone his money.



-- 
 +--------------------------------------------------------------------+
 | 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 |
 +--------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman)
Subject: Destructive and Counter-productive Whining
Organization: Computer Science Department,  Stanford University.
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 00:24:11 GMT


I see the "they're not satisfying me therefore they're evil" whiners
are at it again.  I'm referring to the recent complaints about CCRKBA
fundraising.

Here's a clue.  If they aren't making you happy, don't send them any
money.  Their request doesn't obligate you.

I've got in my hands right now fundraising letters just like the
CCRKBA ones, only they're not from CCRKBA.  They're from other pro-gun
groups.  Where's the whining about them?

CCRKBA does useful activities.  If you don't know about them or don't
value them, don't give.  Don't imply that your decision says anything
about them.  (Which reminds me - what has Neal Knox done in the past 5
years?  CCRKBA has been funding lawsuits, producing and distributing
materials, and lobbying; I'd love to see the NRA be even 10% as
productive with their much larger budget raised by similar means.
Knox writes a monthly column of rehashed info and you folks fall all
over him; I see the same hero-worship for Richardson and Pratt.  Is it
the "tough talk"?  Notice that I'm not suggesting that Knox is "evil"
or that his fundraising activities are "wrong".)

Here's another clue.  The important thing is what you get for your
money, not what someone else makes in providing it.  Any other
standard is envy (or stupid, which is an apt label for the "someone
else could do it for less" whine when there isn't someone else doing
it for said less).  If Brady would go away for $1000, I'd come up with
it, and you folks want to whine about salaries.  I don't notice any of
you working for free....

-andy
--
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: amirza@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Anmar Caves)
Subject: Re: Traveling with a gun
Organization: Indiana University
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 22:34:41 GMT

In article <1i0l92INNn2g@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu> elric@ap.cl.msu.edu (Tom Wright) writes:
>
>Boy, Michigan is pretty anal about handguns, isn't it?

For the most part, but they will allow me to use my Indiana permit
there.


-- 
Anmar Mirza   # Chief of Tranquility  #My Opinions! NotIU's!#Purveyor of
EMT-D         # Base, Lawrence Co. IN # Legalize Explosives!#nontraditional
N9ISY (tech)  # Somewhere out on the  # Politicians prefer  #family values
Networks Tech.# Mirza Ranch.C'mon over# unarmed peasants.   #Space For Rent
From: rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
Date: 6 Jan 93 21:02:23 GMT
Reply-To: rmkhome!rmk@merk.com (Rick Kelly)
Organization: The Man With Ten Cats

In article <1993Jan6.142333.19957@cbnews.cb.att.com> lvc@cbnews.cb.att.com (Larry Cipriani) writes:
>In article <9301051932.51@rmkhome.UUCP> rmkhome!rmk@merk.com (Rick Kelly) writes:
>>Would it make you feel good inside to know that ex-cons who were in for
>>murder or armed robbery could legally buy guns?
>
>No, but passing laws just to make "you feel better" doesn't make sense.
>
>What does making that illegal have to do with keeping guns out of the
>hands of criminals ?  The illegal market for any good can supply almost
>anything if you have the money.  And criminals will spend the money to
>obtain the tools of their "trade."

So it's better to give up and have no restrictions on firearms?

-- 

Rick Kelly    rmkhome!rmk@merk.com    merk!rmkhome!rmk    rmk@frog.UUCP
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: What Problem Is Supposed To Be Solved, Here? (Was: Dressed for Rape)
From: rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly)
Organization: The Man With Ten Cats
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 16:41:16 GMT
Reply-To: rmkhome!rmk@merk.com (Rick Kelly)

In article <ATAYLOR.93Jan5133412@gauss.nmsu.edu> ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy) writes:
><In article <9301042000.28@rmkhome.UUCP> rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:
><In article <1i9o21INNguh@transfer.stratus.com> cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares) writes:
><>In article <9301021327.48@rmkhome.UUCP>, rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:
><>> In article <1hvjpgINN1o3@transfer.stratus.com> cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares) writes:
><>> >In article <9212311212.23@rmkhome.UUCP>, rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:

>	Maybe she reads the newspapers and is aware that violent
>	attack isn't as rare in Massachusetts as it was 40 years
>	ago?

And according to the newspapers, specifically the Boston Globe and the
Middlesex News, the state attorney general's office has released statistics
that show that women are more in danger from being killed by husbands and
boyfriends than any other circumstance.  This statistic must be fairly
accurate if the police chief's association of Massachusetts has publicly,
in print, stated that they are willing to be lenient about giving gun
permits to women who have domestic violence related court orders in effect.

>	Perhaps the police could arrest persons accused of committing
>	criminal acts *after* the act has occurred?
>
>	Does this concept seem too radical for Kelly?

It doesn't help murder victims very much.

>	So, to answer the question: you don't, because people
>	with criminal records generally do not buy their firearms
>	from licensed dealers, they obtain them by other means.

Because under most states laws they can't.

><   And if you believe the recently published statistics, you wife is in
><   the greatest amount of danger from you, and my SO is in the greatest
><   amount of danger from me.
>
>	Which statistics would those be, please, and where were they
>	published?

See above.

>	"If it's in the newspaper, it must be true!"
>					----Dudley DoRight of the Mounties

Obviously, from your point of view, there are no murders or crimes, since
they publish news of them in the newspaper.
-- 

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