HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bill@wabworld.atl.ga.us (Bill Berbenich)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Registering "Assault Keys"
Date: Sun, 08 Nov 92 23:55:38 EST
Distribution: na
Organization: Shaque d'Amour


[Note that I have pared the Newsgroups line to just t.p.g]

gurgle@netcom.com (Pete Gontier) writes:

> How many movies and cartoons have there been in the last few
> decades glorifying Drano? How many do you expect there to be?
> How likely do you think it might be that a child understands
> that Drano is a poison? The very reason you use it as an example
> is that children sometimes eat it because they *don't* know.
> So no, I don't think we should regulate Drano in that context.
> Pick another example. Try kitchen knives. I've got an answer
> for that one, too.

I have an answer for this.  Some here might not like it because it
doesn't paint the NRA as a sinister organization bent upon the
destruction of America.

The Eddie Eagle program is a very successful effort on the part of
the NRA and its volunteers to teach children what to do, and especially
what not to do when they see a firearm of any sort.  "If you see a gun,
don't touch it!  Leave the area and tell an adult right away."

We allow safety programs in our schools to teach about such potentially
dangerous tools as matches, poisons, and explosives, yet there are
those school administrators who deny such safety knowledge to children
when it deals with firearms.  Those administrators either put their own
misguided hate for the NRA above the safety of their young charges or they
just don't care.

Kids should know that Drano is a poison and that they should leave it alone.
Likewise, they should know that all firearms are potentially dangerous to them
and should be left alone.

The Eddie Eagle program cuts through the movie and TV hype and teaches
kids a very basic message about safety in the area of firearms.  That's a
good thing and something kids should know, whether or not they or their
families will ever own a gun.  I'd want my kids to know that sort of thing.
--
"I'm not only the Hair Club president, but I'm also a client."
  -Sy Sperling
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: pa142548@utkvm1.utk.edu (T. Archer)
Subject: Re: 2nd Ammendment
Summary: The Law and the RKBA
Organization: University of Tennessee 
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 22:08:22 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.042020.24521@cbfsb.cb.att.com> colten@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (marc.colten) writes:
>> 
>> According to the law, you aren't a full fledged citizen until you reach
>> 18 yrs of age - you are a minor.  You also can't enter into a contract or get
>> married without parental consent.
>> 
>
>Odd how that changes.  I couldn't vote until I was 21, the same year
>they decided that you could at 18.  So I think age is false argument.
>The legislators could decide that you were a minor until 30 or as
>early as 12.

Yeah.  I don't like it either, but it is the law of the land.

>
>> 
>> A felony conviction disenfranchises you; i.e, restriction of rights, sometimes
>> even to the point of imprisonment [restriction of freedom of movement]
>
>Same thing.  Legislators made it up.  Still it's a restriction of
>the RKBA - who decided which restrictions were okay and which weren't?

Do you want the legal or the philosophical rationale?  I only have so much 
time to waste talking to a closed mind.

In a nutshell, it is not a case of which restrictions, but of what kind.  
The constitional basis for restricting civil liberties for convicted felons 
lies in the "no-ex-post-facto philosphy," or "prior restraint" doctrine.  If 
you place a waiting period on a publication so that the Political Authority 
can check and make sure that there is no inflammatory rhetoric that might 
endanger public order, you are guilty of prior restraint.  You are 
restricting someone's rights because they MIGHT use them to commit a crime.  
On the other hand, if someone deliberately publishes patent falsehoods in an 
effort to commit harm, he has commited libel, and can be charged with a 
crime.

To carry the analogy to its rational conclusion, then, if you place a 
waiting period on handguns, you punish someone because they might commit a 
crime.  If they shoot someone, they have commited a crime.

>> 
>> 
>> Marc, you do have the right to free speech, but try shouting "FIRE" in a 
>> crowded theatre and see what happens.  You'll get arrested, but it will not
>> violate your right to free speech (you did get to say it!).  Rights imply
>> duties; if you choose to exercize a right, you also expect to be punished if
>> you abuse that right.  RKBA is no different.  
>
>Still my same argument - if the RKBA is inviolable and above regulation
>why do you lose it as a minor, or if you broke the law or for acting
>weird and not for other reasons?

As a minor, you don't lose it, your guardians keep it in trust for you.  
None of the rights here are subject to regulation, only some of the possible 
outcomes of the excercise thereof.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Vote Dempublican, it's easier than thinking.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: watt-alan@net.yale.edu (Alan Watt)
Subject: Re: Damage Assessment after Comrade Clinton's victory?
Originator: swatt@mickey.CS.Yale.Edu
Organization: Yale University, Computing & Information Systems
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 13:36:56 GMT


In article <1992Nov9.075028.17704@hawkmoon.mn.org>, gray@hawkmoon.mn.org (Bill 
|> Well, the People's Republic of Minnesotax (TM), never one to let a tax-
|> and-spender go unemployed, gleefully elected Clinoccio, and his faithful
|> companion Algore.
|> 
|> HOWEVER!  We in the 6th Congressional district were able to rouse ourselves
|> from our stupor enought to give Gerry Sikorski a chance to go out and find
|> a Real Job for a change.  We fired him in favor of Rod Grams, a former TV
|> anchorman locally.

There's a good chance he'll go looking for a "real job" in the Clinton
administration.

|> 
|> Feels good, that.

Some of us felt that way in '88, when conservative Democrat Joseph
Liberman unseated liberal Republican Senator Lowell Wiecker.  The
euphoria lasted all of two years before we went and elected him
governer.  Politicians are like bad pennies; the keep turning up.
-- 
  Alan S. Watt
  Yale University			Computing and Information Systems
  Box 2112 Yale Station			(203) 432-6602
  New Haven, CT  06520-2112		Watt-Alan@Yale.Edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: kdlin@advtech.uswest.com (David Lin)
Subject: Re: A Japanese student killed in Lousiana
Organization: U S WEST Advanced Technologies
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 00:10:54 GMT

In article <Bx9q4t.IM4@ncifcrf.gov>, masuda@fcs280b.ncifcrf.gov (Michiaki Masuda) writes:

>    The problem is that even a blood-thirsty, antisocial, emotionally-unstable,
> selfish, over-reactive person (like me, if you want to include) who doesn't
> know how to say, "freeze!" correctly could own a gun without any training nor
> education.

Well, people like that ( yea including you, if you really want to be
included ;) can always buy guns in the black market. Isn't that one of
the top reasons why we ( as normal, social, stable, generous, well-behaved,
well-balanced citizen :) want to arm ourselves?

David
-- 
 K. David Lin, Ph.D.              | E-mail: kdlin@advtech.uswest.com  
 Communication Services Research  | Defend your life with style! -- Beretta
 U S WEST Advanced Technologies   | Disclaimer: Only personal opinions
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: smpod@ariel.lerc.nasa.gov (Stefan)
Subject: Re: You can't fast forward through the next four years
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: who knows
Date:  5 Nov 1992 10:38 EST  

 tomgift@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Tom Gift) writes...
>mpetro@brtph126.bnr.ca (Myron Petro P030) writes:
> 
>>As an NRA member and after asking four other NRA members I can say none of
>>us received a letter endorsing Bush.Considering we were in a close state NC
>>I would have expected us to get one. 
> 
>I was somewhat surprised, too.  Excerpts from the letter follow:

I got one too possibly because of Ohio being a key state.
From: chrisb@natinst.com (Chris Bartz)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: A thought on the comming gun bans
Date: 10 Nov 1992 10:34:47 -0600
Organization: National Instruments, Austin, TX
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: eagle.natinst.com
Keywords: To purchase, or not to purchase....

In article <1992Nov10.022829.10812@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary) writes:
>
>Mostly becuase of the Fifth Amendment to our Constitution: "...[no 
>person shall] be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without
>due process of law; nor shall private priperty be taken for public
>use without just compensation." The current Supreme Court reasonably
>open to just compensation arguments: A recent environmental law, for
>example, where they held that a developer was owed just compensation
>if environmental laws prevented him from building on his lands. Any
>gun prohibition would have to offer _some_ form of just compensation
>in order to be Constitutional (or include a "grandfather" clause
>exempting previous owners.) The real question is, what constitutes
>"just compensation"? Senator Chaffee of Rhode Island seems to think
>that $40 is "just compensation" for the average handgun...
>

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.

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.  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.  (this is one thing the
Republicans are trying to change).

I would be surprised if a gun ban included compensation.  They only
reason they would include compensation would be to get more people 
to go along with it.

-- 
-chris bartz (chrisb@natinst.com)
Xref: sparky talk.politics.guns:23571 talk.politics.drugs:7312 alt.censorship:8592
From: fagin@coos.dartmouth.edu (Barry S. Fagin)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,talk.politics.drugs,alt.censorship
Subject: Libernet: a libertarian/classical-liberal digest and forum
Date: 5 Nov 92 21:07:18 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
Originator: fagin@coos.dartmouth.edu

This is an announcement for Libernet, posted every couple of months
or so to the Usenet politics newsgroups.

***
Members of the network community should know about Libernet,
a mailing-list/discussion group.  Libernet is intended to be a
real-world, high-quality forum for libertarians, classical liberals, and others
interested in applying the philosophy of liberty to tough
policy questions. 

Libernet is for anyone interested in good discussion and provocative ideas, 
including (especially) non-libertarians who are curious about the libertarian 
perspective.  Criticism is not only tolerated but encouraged, provided it is 
kept civil and does not choke the list.  

Libernet is available in two subscription modes: "reflected" and "batch".
"reflected" mode subscribers will receive Libernet messages one at a time,
as they are sent out.  "batch" mode subscribers receive groups of Libernet 
messages in RFC 1154 Digest format, the defacto standard for e-mail digests.
(If you don't know what this means don't worry about it; nothing special
is required to receive batch mode messages).  These batches are published 
daily.  Subscribers should indicate which mode they prefer.

If interested, send mail to libernet-request@dartmouth.edu.  Thank you.

--Barry Fagin (libernet-request@dartmouth.edu)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond)
Subject: LIbbers finally do something (was Re: Damage Assessment) 
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 92 17:59:55 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.

urbin@interlan.interlan.com (Mark Urbin) writes:


>   Here in the PRM (also know as the Commonwealth of Massachusetts), NRA F 
>rated congresscritter Joe `I can bring home the pork' Early lost his job to 
>the NRA endorsed challenger.

Looks like a draw here in Ga.  One notable race that should make the 
Libberites happy is the Ga US senate race pitting Incumbent Wyche Fowler
(D, NRA F) against Coverdell (R, NRA ?) and a Libertarian candidate 
whose name I cannot remember (no ads, no publicity, completely unknown.)  
The lib candidate drew a protest vote of about 8% which was enough to 
throw the election into a runoff.  The Lib guy has asked his voters to
go for Coverdell so maybe we'll be rid of one of Georgia's larger
embarrassments.   

There were two races here where casting a protest vote was perceived 
safe.  This was on.  The other was the labor commissioner.  In both
cases the Libbies got significant votes.  The libbies were in effect,
the "none of the above" candidates.

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: lvc@cbnews.cb.att.com (Larry Cipriani)
Subject: Re: A Japanese student kill in Lousiana (Gun Control)
Organization: Ideology Busters, Inc.
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 18:09:10 GMT

In article <1992Nov06.120804.23396@watson.ibm.com> mjp@vnet.ibm.com (Michael J. Phelps) writes:
>
>To obtain a permit, you have to have 4 character references, a reason,
>pass a NY state background check, a federal (FBI) background check, and
>wait 3-6 months if everything is run according to the books.
>If you live in NY city, its somewhere
>between difficult and impossible to obtain the special NY city permit.

Wouldn't it be easier to just become a gun dealer and keep some inventory
"handy" ?  I recall reading NYC has the highest per-capita rate of gun
dealers in the nation.  This may be due to the restrictive NYC laws.
-- 
Larry Cipriani, att!cbvox1!lvc or lvc@cbvox1.att.com
From: michael@net.bio.net (Michael McClary)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Alternative RKBA Groups Needed
Date: 12 Nov 92 20:12:07 GMT
Organization: McClary Associates

In article <1dt00kINN84q@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> bu008@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Brandon D. Ray) writes:

>In a previous article, jrm@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu () says:

>>[How about forming other pro-gun organizations than the NRA?  Perhaps
>> running an ad showing gram and gramps being beaten by punks.  NRA would
>> never run such an ad.]

>How about the Libertarian Party of the United States?

Hmmm...  Radio and TV stations can refuse paid ads by most political groups,
which is why NRA has trouble airing any.  But I believe they are REQUIRED
to accept them from candidates for election to public office.

On the other hand, Libertarian Party candidates are chronically underfunded.
Yet the party's position is completely pro-gun.

Perhaps there's an opportunity for an alliance here.
From: romigr@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: For masuda@fcs280b.ncif
Date: 6 Nov 92 13:17:32 EST

You seem to hit the RKBA issue on the right note.  In the US this
has been a right and way of life for alot of people through out history


If you have been reading this post in NYC they registared long gu
(((assault weapons.. any gun with a clip feed)))))) which the person
must respond to showing how they dispossed of said gun(s).

This is just one example of how our anti's want to eliminate 
the people from owning guns.  

When I grew up all the kids homes where dad owend firearms had the
rifles on the wall in the family room.  We would come home from school
both parents still at work look at the guns but never touched any as 
that was the way we had been taught.  I'm sure they were unloaded for
safety reasons.  I had a debate in this newsgroup which came to the
conclusion that crime control not gun control is more effective
in preventing most deaths buy guns. 

I can't give you all the culture of US in one post but I hope you can
see from my point of view that for me guns are still a way of life for me
as I hunt, compete in target shoots,self defence(with responsible saftey)
part of my local non gov miltia.

			RDR NRA/ILA/USMC
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: sjo@cci632.cci.com (Steve Owens)
Subject: Re: A thought on the comming gun bans
Keywords: To purchase, or not to purchase....
Organization: [Computer Consoles, Inc., Rochester, NY
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 21:51:53 GMT

In article <1992Nov9.165550.14827@mdd.comm.mot.com> booth@mdd.comm.mot.com (Greg Booth) writes:
>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?

	That's why I mentioned the fact that I could be out up to the
full $700.  I'm not sure I'd get any compensation.

>
>
>-- 
>Greg Booth BSc                    |     /_____________________________
>BCAA-PCDHF-BCWF-NFA-NRA-IPSC-BCFSS|@====|_____________________________>
>Motorola Mobile Data Division     |     \
>booth@mdd.comm.mot.com cgb003@email.comm.mot.com


						Steve


------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Read between the lines                             Steven J Owens @ CCI
 Criticize the words they're selling             (716) 482-5000 Ext 2867
 Think for yourself and feel the walls                 sjo@op632.cci.com
 Become sand beneath your feet." - Queensryche "Anybody Listening?"
From: donb@igor.tamri.com (Don Baldwin)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Need Better NRA Ads NOW !
Date: 5 Nov 92 19:32:03 GMT
Organization: TOSHIBA America MRI, South San Francisco, CA

In article <1992Nov4.230541.18332@ttinews.tti.com> hollombe@polymath.tti.com
(The Polymath) writes:
>}... The camera peers over his shoulder
>}as he uses his AR-15 sporter with collapsable stock from beside his bed 
>}to gun down the Mad Dogs as they storm through the door.
>}The flick ends with him showing his very alive family and his NRA Firearms 
>}Instructor shoulder patch and the voice over says "Another family saved 
>}through superior firepower and training to use it from the NRA. 1 800...."
>
>I am an NRA firearms instructor.  The NRA does not teach police/combat
>weapons techniques to civilians, period.
>
>The above scenario is completely unrealistic in any case and would almost
>certainly result in the deaths of the homeowner and his family.  The kind
>of attitudes such fantasies project cost gun owners more votes than a
>thousand positive ads could ever compensate for.
>
>Think about it.

In other words, if the police burst into your house with machine guns,
wearing masks, without identifying themselves, you shouldn't even think
about defending yourself?

Innocent people are killed in that kind of raid.

       don
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: pa142548@utkvm1.utk.edu (T. Archer)
Subject: Re: 2nd Ammendment
Summary: Who said they couldn't "carry concealed"
Organization: University of Tennessee 
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 22:17:14 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.170211.18927@cbfsb.cb.att.com> colten@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (marc.colten) writes:
>> 
>> *Sigh*, if the folks in the restaurant had been able to carry
>> concealed, then most probably the incident in Killeen would never
>> have been on the national news in the first place. The unreasonable
>> restriction of their RKBA kept them from defending themselves
>> and others in this situation. This situation was more of
>> a defeat for the HCI crowd than the RKBA crowd if you think about
>> it a bit. I *know* there are a lot more folks in this forum who can/will
>> probably jump on this assertion of yours with additional
>> evidence/facts relating to that case. All of this has been rehashed
>> here in tpg *numerous* times.
>> 
>
>In the first place who said they couldn't "carry concealed" - they
>could apply for licenses and get the guns. 

The Texas State Legislature and Govenor.  For all of her "wild west" PR, the 
Lone Star State has some of the most frighteningly totalitarian anti-gun 
laws in the nation.


>Hell, they sell them
>in department stores here in Georgia!  

Texas is not Georgia, and getting a conceal carry permit in Texas is no easy 
thing.  You have to have "a compelling reason."

>and I'm arguing against people
>who say that because the RKBA is mentioned in the 2nd amendment that
>no laws limiting them can be passed.

You can't limit rights, only actions.

>
>So let's look at Killeen, again. There are no laws restricting the
>right of honest, law-abiding citizens to buy weapons.  

Yes, there are.

>Or on anyone
>else since it is in infringement of our rights to even ask us who
>we are, or make us wait while they see if the id we have is real.
>So maybe 50% of the people in the restaurant in Killeen were sitting
>there comfortably with .38's on them.  And the guy walks in with
>a semi-automatic rifle.  Do you agree that a nut would be more likely to
>do just that - go for the big weapon.  So what would the people do -
>make it routine to carry semi-automatic's and then the guy walks in
>with a fully automatic Uzi or Mac-10.

I am sorry, but I don't see how this follows, or how it is relevant.

>
>This is what I'm trying to argue against - some kind of arms race
>on our streets where you can have any weapon you want, but can't
>send your kid to the burger king without an armed escort - lunchtime
>in Beirut.

Allowing americans to excercise thier fundamental civil liberties in 
carrying means of self defense is not going to result in some kind of 
domestic arms race.  You are makeing a leap of logic that I jsut can't 
follow.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Vote Dempublican, it's easier than thinking.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns