From: donb@igor.tamri.com (Don Baldwin)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: CLINTON NEW TEXT: GUN CONTROL
Date: 21 Aug 92 17:09:20 GMT
Organization: TOSHIBA America MRI, South San Francisco, CA

N.B.  Nothing I say here should be construed as an attack on Mary Jacobs,
who was kind enough to post this in response to questions about gun control.

    don

In article <92234.010157U45301@uicvm.uic.edu> Mary Jacobs
<U45301@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:
>SEND COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS INFORMATION TO THE
>CLINTON/GORE CAMPAIGN AT 75300.3115@COMPUSERVE.COM
>(This information is posted for public education/information purposes.
>It does not necessarily represent the views of The University.)
>========================================================================
>                         CLINTON  GORE ON GUN CONTROL
>
>Every year, more than 20,000 Americans are killed with handguns;many thousands
>more are injured.

Aren't about half of the 20,000 suicides?  And if you take 10,000 as the
number murdered by criminals, that's still smaller than the number of
people who die in accidental falls.  And when you compare that with the
estimated 645,000 cases per year where an innocent protects herself/himself
from criminal attack (and 200,000 more annual cases where a gun is used
for protection against dangerous animals), it seems to me that the case
against guns IN THE HANDS OF LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS is quite weak.

>A large and growing number of these victims are killed by
>semi-automatic assault weapons which have no legitimate
>sporting purpose.

This is patently untrue.  Even the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms
admits that semi-auto assault weapons only account for 1% of gun crime.

>The large majority of gun owners are law-abiding citizens who use their guns in
>a responsible manner. Bill Clinton and Al Gore know that the Constitution
>guarantees an individuals basic right to keep and bear arms, and they will
>uphold that right.

If they admit the 2nd Amendment's protection of an individual right, then
that's a point in their favor.

>Support the Brady Bill
>
>Sign the Brady Bill, which mandates a 5-day waiting period for handgun
>purchases to allow police sufficient time to determine whether intended
>purchasers are underage or have criminal backgrounds, drug histories, or mental
>health histories.  Al Gore was a primary author and
>cosponsor of the Senate version of the Brady Bill, which includes a
>background check.  Bill Clinton has endorsed the Brady Bill.

Wrong!  The Brady Bill mandates a SEVEN day waiting period but doens't mandate
a background check.  Thus, the legitimate gun owner (few criminals get their
guns legally) is subjected to the gratuitous harassment of a waiting period
for no good purpose.  In adition, if his/her police department chooses not
to acknowledge receipt of the paperwork, it amounts to a de facto handgun
ban.

>Ban assault weapons
>
>Ban semi-automatic assault weapons that have no legitimate hunting purpose and
>support the right of local law enforcement officials to ban such weapons
>when gangs move into their neighborhoods.
>
>Limit access to multiple-round clips like the ones used in the tragic killings
>in Killeen, Texas.

Who is to determine whether a firearm serves a "legitimate hunting purpose"?
Present California Law is clearly frivolous, mandating registration of "assault
weapons" mostly on the basis of how nasty they look.  Most are functionally
identical to sporting arms that aren't considered "evil" because they have
wood, as opposed to plastic, stocks.

Re multi-round clips:  Is he saying that ANY magazine that holds two or
more bullets will be illegal?

>Create a National Police Corps and offer veterans and active military
>personnel a chance to become law enforcement officers at home.  This will
>add 100,000 new police officers to the streets.

To enforce which laws?  Will they be in charge of enforcing Federal Law,
duplicating the work of the FBI?  Or will they merely enforce local laws?

Either way, this proposal makes me REAL nervous.

>Enact tougher sentences for criminals who use guns.

This, I can live with.

>Implement a federal program for safe schools so children can concentrate on
>learning.

It would be interesting to hear some specifics.

Did Hillary Clinton REALLY say something to the effect that "the children
belong to the State"?

Look, I'm a pretty Liberal registered Democrat...but, based on what's
said above, I don't see any way that I could ever vote for Clinton.  If
he's willing to reconsider some of what he says, then I might have some
alternative to voting Libertarian.

    don
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns