HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: miles@ms.uky.edu (Stephen D. Grant)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Open Carry, Why Not?
Date: 18 Nov 92 21:37:51 GMT
Organization: University of Kentucky, USA. -5 GMT

matwesx@gsusgi2.gsu.edu (William E. Sadler) writes:

>kkirksey@world.std.com (Ken B Kirksey) writes:
>> 
>>Here's my question to ya'll:  given that I've the opportunity, can you
>>think of any reason why I shouldn't carry?  Many thanks in advance.

>Yeah, some real good ones.
>Despite the fact that carrying openly is legal, you will in fact cause
>quite a 'stir' in the local populace if you start 'packin heat' openly.  In

 I beg to differ. Here in Kentucky open carry is also legal.
 When I first found this out, I decided to "test" it and see if I would be
 hassled etc. I rode around (on a motorcycle no less) for about 3 weeks with
 a Sig P226 on my side. I went into several small towns around the area as
 well as large cities. I was never stopped once. And there was never any
 "stir" caused anywhere I went. Maybe NC is different.. I doubt it.

>discussing such options w/ the Winston-Salem police, they allowed that even
>though technically legal, you quite likely will be stopped and questioned by
>every police officer who notice you, some quite nervously.  It is not a good
>idea to make a gun-totin individual real nervous.

 Maybe you took one officers word as department policy/gospel. On the other
hand, any locality may have its "quirks".

>Aslo, they intimidated that it would be *real* easy to get run in for the 
>slightest offense if you were carrying openly.

>Lastly, they flat out said that they would probably arrest you for 'creating
>a public disturbance' or some such.  Which you probably would be doing! :)

 Bullshit. If its legal, its legal.  Sounds like the cops you talked to are
as Dan would say "pigs". 

>While I would never advocate breaking of the law, espically on a public forum,
>the best option if you are in a situation where you must carry, is to carry, 
>and face the music if you ever need your piece.  If you ever find yourself in
>a position where you need the gun, and don't have it, you will see to it that 
>you are never in that position again.  And if your straits were so dire as to 
>suddenly make it obvious that you were carrying, well, then facing 12 is better
>than being carried by 6.  Sorry for the old cliche, but that doesn't make it
>any less true.

> William E. Sadler          |    Internet: matwesx@gsusgi2.gsu.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy)
Subject: Re: The "Invisible" Glock Mythology
Organization: NMSU Computer Science
	<1992Nov13.181316.203267@uctvax.uct.ac.za>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 16:09:05 GMT

<In article <1992Nov13.181316.203267@uctvax.uct.ac.za> glngar01@uctvax.uct.ac.za writes:

<Other metal detectors are not so sensitive. I saw a program called "American
<Expose on Terrorism"(???) where the presentor goes to the Capitol to speak to
<the security head. You plainly see him walk through the metal detector with
<nary a beep but later while talking to the security chief he showed the
<security head the (unloaded) Glock he had brought through security.
<The security head was dumbfounded.(It appears the detector was set too low as
<the people were annoyed that large amounts of change and keys set off the
<detector [and rightly they should, how much steel is there in a small .22 or
<.25acp?])

	There is probably less steel in a small .22/.25 than in the
	Glock; the mass of steel in a Colt Chief's Special is
	approximately equal to the mass of steel in a Glock.

	The Chief's Special is a 6-shot .38 caliber snubnosed
	revolver....even Handgun Control Inc. has never claimed
	*THAT* weapon to be "invisible".

<All security measures are useless if the people operating them do not do so
<properly.
 
	Precisely.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: hollombe@polymath.tti.com (The Polymath)
Subject: Re: Need Better NRA Ads NOW !
Organization: The Cat Factory
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 01:19:56 GMT

In article <1992Nov16.220912.27918@igor.tamri.com> donb@igor.tamri.com (Don Baldwin) writes:
}In article <1992Nov16.164431.24212@ttinews.tti.com> hollombe@polymath.tti.com
}(The Polymath) writes:

}>I have to agree.  If you survive I'll congratulate you.  If you die, I'll
}>mourn your passing.  I think we'll all (us and the cops) be much better
}>off if it never happens at all.  Making the police change their procedures
}>in response to public pressure now is safer all around than shooting it
}>out with them when they make a mistake.
}
}Do you have suggestions for how to go about making them change their
}procedures?

As I said elsewhere, the ballot box is our first line of defense.
Protests, letter writing campaigns, phone trees all work for other causes,
why not this one?  Even running for office is an option.

}Have you made such an attempt? ...

I confess I have not, mostly because that sort of thing isn't a
significant problem where I live.  Up 'til about four years ago I lived in
Santa Monica, which, IMHO, has one of the finest PDs in the world.  I now
live in one of L.A.'s many middle-class suburbs and the only problem I
have with the LAPD is finding an on-duty officer when I need one
(fortunately, an extremely rare occurrence).

The Polymath (aka: Jerry Hollombe, M.A., CDP, aka: hollombe@polymath.tti.com)
Head Robot Wrangler at Citicorp
3100 Ocean Park Blvd.   (310) 450-9111, x2483
Santa Monica, CA  90405
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: feustel@netcom.com (David Feustel)
Subject: Paxton Quigley on Faith Daniel's Show!
Organization: DAFCO: OS/2 Software Support & Consulting
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 00:17:14 GMT

I only saw the last few minutes of today's Faith Daniels show,
but there was Faith at a gun range firing a shot at a target and
hitting it dead center! She was excited and apparently became a
pro-gun convert as a result of her experience at the range. Paxton was
one of 4 guests on the show. As far as I could tell, there were two
women who had been raped, both of which having post traumatic stress
syndrome. One said she wouldn't dare have a gun in the house because
she would shoot one of her kids during a PTSS-induced hallucination
(she was a little incoherent even on the show). The other said she
felt that her PTSS would not interfere with her ability to defend
herself. The 4th guest said nothing while I was watching. Definitely
made my day!

-- 
Dave Feustel N9MYI <feustel@netcom.com>
 
GE knew there was lots of money to be made in the diagnostic medical
machine field since it was only a matter of time before people started
getting sick from the effects of all of GE's toxic and radioactive
waste dumping. I expect GE to get into the Mortuary business next.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: shaffer@achilles.ctd.anl.gov (Michael A. Shaffer)
Subject: Re: Alternative RKBA Groups Needed
Organization: Argonne National Laboratory
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 18:20:38 GMT

>	Sir, I strongly suggest that you watch quite a bit more
>	TV. Dull and trite as it may be, it is the prime feed
>	for popular culture. Who was it that said "know your enemy" ?
>	In this case, TV has become the enemy. Observe how it
>	undermines the will to resist aggression, how it portrays
>	effective resisters as lunatics, how it glorifies the
>	'Bambi mentality'. Somehow or other, wimpish and passive
>	attitudes got mixed into the otherwise positive trend

I am well aware of their distortions. I know the enemy well enough and
other who do watch fill me in on any important new information. TV
is a huge waste of time. I prefer to seek out the truth rather than 
fill my mind with lies.

After all I don't have to crawl into a garbage can to know that it stinks.

> |>				And for gods [sc for non-theists] 
> |> 	sake, don't place pro-gun ads in GUN MAGAZINES ! Talk about
> |> 	preaching to the converted ...)
> 
> I agree that every effort must be made to get more exposure in the
> popular magazine, TV etc but I think that the ads in the gun magazines
> are useful considering that only a tiny minority of gun owners in this
> country are members of any pro-RKBA organization.

	You are correct ... but 90% of these ads are in gun mags
	alone. This is a waste of money. Put a *few* ads in such
	magazines and save the big cashwas for the 'not-us'.

OK you say NRA isn't doing all it can I say I think they are doing as
well as can be expected. I tell you what. Why don't you take them (NRA)
up on their tv ad deal. You or your gun club can purchase a tv spot
for the NRA. Call them for details or see AR or AH. Seems like you
are asking where is the NRA? Where are you?

				mike
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: miles@ms.uky.edu (Stephen D. Grant)
Subject: Re: Japanese exchange student killed in Louisiana...
    <1992Nov14.184926.21506@ms.uky.edu>
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 18:48:59 GMT
Organization: University of Kentucky, USA. -5 GMT

I think an important part of this particular story is the fact that the
shooter came out of the safe refuge of his home to shoot an unarmed person.
I can understand being worried, even being armed, (I would be) but in many
states, the prosecutors would be asking why he didn't call the police and
remain inside.
From: Chris Struble <mece3d@uh.jetson.edu>
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Open Carry, Why Not?
Date: 23 Nov 1992 23:55:57 GMT
Organization: University of Houston
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.7.104.199
X-UserAgent: Nuntius v1.1.1d12
X-XXMessage-ID: <A736C2AE9B0168C7@mac.me.uh.edu>
X-XXDate: Mon, 23 Nov 92 17:17:34 GMT

In article <Uf2g8Ny00Uh7I5qXA1@andrew.cmu.edu> Seth Adam Eliot,
se08+@andrew.cmu.edu writes:

>In other words, just because you are allowed legal public carry, doesn't
>mean that store owners and such need let you on their premises while
>armed.  I'd imagine that the local bank guard may be disconcerted...

Actually, a friend told me once that in Alaska, it is LEGAL to carry a
gun 
INTO a bank so long as you let the bank guard know you have it. Can 
anyone confirm this? This sounds too wild to be true. 

I would assume it does not include LOADED weapons :-)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
| Christian Struble    | Department of Mechanical Engineering         |
| MECE3D@UH.JETSON.EDU | University of Houston, Houston 77204-4792    |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
|    The true civilization is where every man gives to every other    |
|    every right that he claims for himself  --  Robert Ingersoll     |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: hollombe@polymath.tti.com (The Polymath)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: 2nd Ammendment
Date: 16 Nov 92 16:56:53 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: The Cat Factory

In article <1dvp4mINN1k5@cae.cad.gatech.edu> vincent@cad.gatech.edu (Vincent Fox) writes:
}In <1992Nov11.022759.12655@ttinews.tti.com> hollombe@polymath.tti.com (The Polymath) writes:
}>In article <73907@hydra.gatech.EDU>, gt1111a@prism.gatech.EDU (Vincent Fox) writes:
}>}... The guy in Killeen had a Glock. ...
}>}... Like most pistols, the range at which you can actually hit anything
}>}is about 10 feet, good knife range. Beyond that, only the most amazing amount
}>}of luck, practice and a much better pistol than a Glock will allow you to hit
}>}the side of a barn. ...

}>The Glock is one of the best combat pistols on the market.  I can shoot
}>2.5" groups with one at 25 feet all day ...

}... Perhaps I should have said "A novice under less than ideal
}combat conditions will have (perhaps fatal) difficulty placing that
}important first shot or two in some vital area of a man-size target
}roughly 10 feet away". There is that better?

A bit.  I'd consider ten feet to be point blank range for all but the
smallest derringers.  Even leaving that aside, what's the relevance?
You're assuming everyone who carries is a novice and none of them could
have gotten within ten feet of the killer.  We have testimony from people
who lived through the incident that neither of those conditions were met
in this case.  I see no reason to assume they would be met in any
comparable situation.

The Polymath (aka: Jerry Hollombe, M.A., CDP, aka: hollombe@polymath.tti.com)
Head Robot Wrangler at Citicorp
3100 Ocean Park Blvd.   (310) 450-9111, x2483
Santa Monica, CA  90405
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Alternative RKBA Groups Needed
Date: 20 Nov 92 21:48:13 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: rocket.sw.stratus.com

In article <1992Nov19.221638.1897@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu>, jrm@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu writes:
> In article <22512@drutx.ATT.COM>, dlo@druwa.ATT.COM (OlsonDL) writes:

> > But there have been NRA ads on network TV.  They've usually featured
> > Charleton Heston and a few other celebs.
> 
> 	EXACTLY ! All I have been hearing is how the NRA and groups
> 	with a similar interest can't get anyone to run their ads.
> 	Well, obviously, there ARE places that will run the ads.

Make sure when you say "network TV" that you really MEAN NETWORK TV.  
I made a similar claim about these ads, but someone here pointed out 
to me that UHF outlets aren't the same animal.  (Since then I haven't
seen ANY NRA ads, so I haven't been able to check it out.)

Still I agree that publicity is lacking.  I once proposed that local
gun clubs advertise their safety courses in the local newspapers.  I
still think it's a good idea.  The only problem I can see with it is
that the courses are ALREADY oversubscribed WITHOUT advertising!
-- 

cdt@pdp.sw.stratus.com      --If you believe that I speak for my company,
OR cdt@vos.stratus.com        write today for my special Investors' Packet...
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: lvc@cbnews.cb.att.com (Larry Cipriani)
Subject: Bill would allow Texans to carry concealed handguns
Organization: Ideology Busters, Inc.
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 19:45:27 GMT
Keywords: gun control, social issues, state government, government,
	violent crime, legal

"Copyright 1992 by UPI
Reposted with permission from the ClariNet Electronic Newspaper newsgroup
clari.news.issues.  For more info on ClariNet, write to info@clarinet.com
or phone 1-800-USE-NETS."

	AUSTIN, Texas (UPI) -- A state legislator Tuesday filed a bill that
would allow Texans to carry concealed handguns.
	Rep. Bill Carter, R-Fort Worth, said the law would legalize what many
Texans are already doing -- carrying handguns to protect themselves
against the rising level of violent crime.
	Under the proposal, Texans over the age of 21 could carry a gun if
they passed a criminal records check and a background investigation by
the Department of Public Safety. They would also have to take a mimimum
15-hour firearms education course, pass a written exam and demonstrate
proficiency in handling a weapon.
	People who are addicted to drugs or alcohol and those convicted of a
felony or a Class A or B misdemeanor in the last five years would be
ineligible for the program.
	Carter said the handgun law would ``put us on a level playing field
with the criminals.'' He denied that the law would lead to a surge in
the number of people buying handguns.
	A similar bill passed the Texas Senate in the 1991 session but did
not make it through the House. Carter's bill will be considered in the
Legislature's regular session beginning in January.
-- 
Larry Cipriani, att!cbvox1!lvc or lvc@cbvox1.att.com
From: bb063@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Christopher J. Crobaugh)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Fla. Nat. Guard Leaving
Date: 16 Nov 1992 12:10:40 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc10.ins.cwru.edu


It may be a good idea for those who use this net to keep the rest
of us posted on what REALLY happens after the National Guard
leaves South Florida in the next few days.....there may well be
some very good publicity for privately owned firearms (not to
mention ASSAULT WEAPONS) to add to the rash of good publicity
guns have gotten already from the area. 
God knows that gun owners (as well as ALL Americans) are goingg
to need all the good publicity we can get, what with the
prevaricating, philandering draft dodger about to take up 
White House residence.
I for one would certainly appreicate this information, if there
are any south Floridians monitoring.
A Cleveland Plain Dealer (AP?) story in the 11-15 (Sunday)
paper had in interesting quote: a Homestead (FL) resident asked
a departing Guardsman "Who will watch my house after you leave?"
The guardsman answered, "Who watched it before we came?"
Something to think about.
-- 
bb063@Cleveland.Freenet.Edu  Chris Crobaugh - (216) 327-6655 (V)
"Those who would sacrifice essential liberties for a little 
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." B. Franklin
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight)
Subject: Re: Registered Keys - why the need?
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 05:35:42 GMT


Charles Kincy's absurd distortion of the English language to serve his
special pleading is so grotesque that no comment beyond calling attention
to it is required.

Zahai Stewart, despite his personal views being on the other side
(being pro-gun ownership), has carefully concluded what was meant by
"militia" from the language of the Constitution itself. He gets full
marks for honesty in the face of his own desires.
-- 
David Sternlight
(pgp 2.0 and ripem public keys available on request)
From: ckincy@mcs213h.cs.umr.edu (Charles Kincy)
Subject: Re: Registered Keys - why the need?
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 04:45:47 GMT
Organization: University of Missouri - Rolla

In article <1992Nov16.053542.15841@netcom.com> strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) writes:
>
>Charles Kincy's absurd distortion of the English language to serve his
>special pleading is so grotesque that no comment beyond calling attention
>to it is required.
>
>Zahai Stewart, despite his personal views being on the other side
>(being pro-gun ownership), has carefully concluded what was meant by
>"militia" from the language of the Constitution itself. He gets full
>marks for honesty in the face of his own desires.

What the hell is this?  Dude, at least attempt to argue with someone
when you insult them.  I mean, I could call you a communist pudwanker,
but it gets us nowhere.

cpk
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,talk.rape
From: osan@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (Mr. X)
Subject: Re: A Coffee-House Conversation with a REAL Nadja
Organization: Twilight Zone
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 19:20:15 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.193027.29431@cbnewsl.cb.att.com> rlt@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (r l taylor) writes:
>In article <1992Nov18.191254.20814@cbfsb.cb.att.com> osan@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (Mr. X) writes:
>
>>	I was surprised to see a piece on the tube last night
>>	on women and guns.  They interviewed a Holmdel, NJ housewife that also
>>	happens to ne a certified instructor who teaches women how to defend
>>	themselves with guns.  She was very cool indded.
>
>I wish I'd seen that...Did anyone happen to catch her name, or know what
>program/channel it was?  I know people in Holmdel who might be interested...
>
>I wonder if Holmdel is a little pocket of freedom in this oppressive state?

	Sadly, this is not the case.  Holmdel is, if anything, perhaps WORSE
	than most other areas since money resides there.

	Oh, another thing this female instructor mentioned was that LOTS of
	women are packing regardless of what the lousy laws say.  She did
	not seem terribly broken up at all by this fact.  Made *me* happy
	enough!

>Back when I lived there (admittedly many years ago) we had a .22 range in
>our basement, and a rifle club that met and practiced in the basement of
>the local Reformed Church.  Maybe there's still hope? :-)

	20 years ago when I was a kid in Freehold, I lived right across the
	street from the Township high school, behind which was at least 1000
	acres of empty land.  When bored, or otherwise  desiring to go
	plinking, I could go into my step fathers room, choose from a dizzying
	array of weapons and ammo, sachet across the street and into the woods,
	and shoot till I fell unconscious.  Nobody gave a damn as long as no
	one got hurt (and I had a perfect safety record). 

	Today, if I were to do the same thing, I would wind up in the slammer
	so fast I wouldn't have a clue for days.  Sad.

	-Andy V.
From: bd@fluent@dartmouth.EDU (Brice Dowaliby)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Hattori shooting
Date: 23 Nov 92 13:43:29 GMT
Reply-To: bd%fluent@dartmouth.EDU
Organization: Fluent Inc., Lebanon NH


Many people have taken me to task for saying in a previous post
that rather than shoot Hattori, the shooter should have left
the building.  The general tone of the complaints was "and leave
your wife and children without defense - you're an ass."

Frankly, the first I had heard about the wife and children was
in the responses to my post.

So, now knowing about the wife and kiddies, have I changed my
mind about the shooting?  Do I now think it was the "right"
thing to do?

No, I don't.  I still feel that the guy was wrong in shooting Hattori.
Part of the responsibility that comes with gun ownership is knowing
when to shoot and when not to.  It's all well and good for
people to say "Well, he was afraid for his life, so it was
reasonable for him to shoot".  I disagree with this.

So, what would I have done in the shooter's position?

No guarantee, but I like to think that I would have grabbed the baseball
bat and my wife would have grabbed the shotgun.  With my wife beside me
(perhaps a little behind, but not so's I'm in the line of fire) I would
confront the intruder.  If he approached in such a way as to give
me the impression he was a threat, I would respond with the bat.  

If he pulled a weapon on me I would leave it to my wife to shoot.

Other people have yelled at me for "pre-judging" the case and wanting to
convict the man before his trial.

This is b.s., pure and simple.  This whole thread (and quite a long one 
it has been, for t.p.g.) has been a bunch of people talking with only 
a few facts at their disposal, and I don't feel I'm out of line
for venturing an opinion on it.

I have not called for the man's conviction once - I do support
the concept of the man being tried, however, for in my opinion
the man acted irresponsibly with a deadly weapon, the result of which
is the death of a (probably) innocent person.

It's up to the prosecutor to prove his guilt.
-- 
   Brice Dowaliby, Fluent Inc., 10 Cavendish Court, Lebanon, NH  03766
                         bd%fluent@dartmouth.edu        
             I don't speak for them, they don't speak for me
                              DoD # 0698
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: ice@socrates.umd.edu (Fredrik Nyman)
Subject: Re: Firearms laws in the Maryland, Virginia, D.C. area...?
Organization: University of Maryland University College
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 13:54:26 GMT

fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary) writes:

>In article <18NOV199202175216@zeus.tamu.edu> mjm3170@zeus.tamu.edu (MATTSON, MATTHEW JUL) writes:
>>Because i might possibly be taking a job with the Federal Govt. this next year
>>(I cannot expand on this...) I am interested in the firearms laws of the states
>>I mentioned in the subject line.  Can anyone help me out?

>If memory serves, Maryland has a 5(?)-day waiting period on firearms
>sales and a ban on "assault weapons" (whatever they are...). Virginia
>has a instant background check system for purchases. In Washington,
>D.C. _all_ handguns are illegal at all times and places (unless you
>are a police officer of licensed private security), longarms are
>legal but must be stored disassembled.

MD used to be 7 days, but I think it's been bumped to 14 days now.
In practice it takes about a month.  The waiting period only applies
to handguns and to weapons the state has definied as "assault rifles"
though, so if you need to shoot someone right away in MD, buy a rifle
at K-mart instead -- accuracy and lethality will be far greater anyway.