From: jtisdel@digi.lonestar.org (J. Michael Tisdel)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Gun Control:  A modern, REALISTIC view.
Date: 17 Nov 92 15:27:32 GMT
Organization: DSC Communications Corp, Plano, TX

In article <1992Nov16.085334.10791@nntp.uoregon.edu> davidw@cie.uoregon.edu (David Weingarten) writes:
>
>davidw@cie.uoregon.edu (David Weingarten) writes:
>>> OK, I've got to set some of this in perspective.  Let me start
>>> out by saying that I am TOTALLY anti-gun.  England has something
>>> like 7-10 gun deaths a year, and we have 20,000 or more.  That
>>> alone says something.  I am for STRICT gun restrictions.
>
>>you realize, of course, that every place such restrictions have been
>>put into place they've failed miserably.
>
>Like?

Okay, this one is easy:
   o New York City
   o Washington D.C.
   o Los Angeles (remember those riots?)

[...]

>Encryption programs are a joke to the military.
>One of my friends from college was Air Force Intelligence, and he
>said they got hundreds of letters a day with "uncrackable" codes.
>He said none of them took their computer more than about 2 minutes
>to crack.  You could use some of the mathematical encryption that's
>on, for instance, typical UNIX systems, but if you did, they'd just
>shut down your phones.  You don't actually think they'd be nice
>and LET you send encrypted messages, do you?  How dumb are you?

One might suggestion 2 codes which are very difficult if not impossible
to break unless you posses the key:

  o one-time pad - Sender & receiver each has a pad with a different
    cypher on each page.  Message 1 uses page 1.  Message 2 uses page
    2.  Each cypher is different -- random combination or other method
    for this cypher -- and the constant chaning code will prevent the
    "Authorities" from decoding your message *before* your fellow
    conspirator does.  Not perfect, but damn difficult.

  o Book code - Sender & receiver each has a copy of the same book.
    The code consists of a string of numbers indicating page, paragraph,
    line, and word.  The receiver uses his book to decode the message.
    This is unbreakable unless the authorities have the same book.

Now, cryptography has improved greatly in the last 50 years, if there
have been advancements on cracking these codes, I would be interested
in knowing -- don't want to perpetuate wrong information...

[...]
  
>What was that college that got fired on in the 60's?

Kent State.

[...]

>It always depresses me to find that people are actually so 
>self-deceived as to think they could overcome something as formidable
>as the US Military.  Isn't it more productive to try to work WITH
>the government?  I mean, if the government got THAT out of hand,
>you can believe that I'd be one of the first to die trying to fight
>it, but I sure wouldn't expect to win.  I'd be fighting simply as a
>matter of principle.
>
>			-- David

David, I would like to remind you of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.
The Soviets had a similar military superiority (as did the British Empire
in the 19th century when they tried the same thing) but the mujahadeen
( I *know* I spelled that wrong) were able to make the invaders impotent
outside of Kabul.  Eventually it became too expensive to maintain the
fight so the Red Army pulled out.  Similar instances can be found through-out
history; the defense of Stalingrad comes to mind.
-- 
-----------------------------------\\\\\\\\\\\\\---------------------------
J. Michael Tisdel                   \\\\\\\\\\\\\ jtisdel@digi.lonestar.org
DSC Communications Corporation       \\\\\\\\\\\\\   ...!uunet!digi!jtisdel
1000 Coit Rd, MS 120, Plano Tx 75075  \\\\\\\\\\\\\        jmtisdel@aol.com
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns