HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson)
Subject: Re: U.S. Senate Approves Repeal Legislation for D.C. Ordinance
Keywords: dc, strict liability
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 03:47:54 GMT


lvc@cbnews.cb.att.com (Larry Cipriani) writes:

>Senators voting to uphold the chair's ruling against the Smith
>motion were:

>Tom Harkin (IA)

	Guess who doesn't get my vote?

>The following senators voted to repeal the DC ordinance:

>Charles Grassley (IA)

	Though I think him an asshole personally, guess who gets a
vote from me?

	I was watching some politico-show this morning, and the chair
from the Republican party was on. He said something to the extent of,
" there are times when the good of the country comes before politics."
I always thought the good of the country came *before* politics in all
cases?   Guess who I am voting for as president?

<Dan Sorenson, DoD #1066 |"There'll be angels on Ariels in leather>
<z1dan@exnet.iastate.edu | and chrome, Ridin' down from heaven    >
<viking@iastate.edu      | just to carry me home." -- R. Thompson >
< ISU thinks I need more education, which they provide for a fee. >
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: cescript@mtu.edu (Charles Scripter)
Subject: Re: No charges filed in SWAT killing
Organization: Michigan Technological University
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 21:26:22 GMT

In article <bd!nwx#@dixie.com>, jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond) writes:
> viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson) writes:
> 
> Whatever happened to the concept that the police are supposed to lay their
> lives on the line if necessary to protect innocent life?  The gestapo in
> blue storming a house on the basis of an anonymous tip is NOT the same
> as a private citizen protecting his property from mauraders.

I agree with you here.  But I think the "War on Drugs" hype has brainwashed
more than just the police into thinking that the "War" is more important
than one's Civil Rights.

> There is simply NO REASON, PERIOD, for the cops ever to storm
> the house in the middle of the night except to rescue innocents.
> If the cops need to capture a person in a house, they can do it
> the old fashioned way by staking out the house and capturing the
> perp coming or going.  

This seems reasonable, too.  Also, a stake-out would allow the cops to
determine if the suspect is present, how many "non-combatants" are present,
etc. (this presumes that the suspect is a "combatant", of course).

> >	As for the police, most have my respect, and SWAT teams have my
> >respect, but like any group there are individuals I don't respect.  Tony
> >may be one of them, or he may be innocent of intentional wrongdoing.  I
> >prefer to let those who are fully informed decide.
> 
> You know, you really ought to find someone who lived in Germany in the 
> [............]

I don't see how this is related to Dan's statement.  I agree with the idea
of letting a Board of Inquiry sort it out.  It is important that _justice_
be served.  It is important that this shooting be reviewed.   I would be
surprised if it wasn't tried in court (let the jury sort it out).

> Think about this a bit and if you still think Good Ole Tony is a
> reasonable person who just made a little mistake, you are a blithering
> idiot.  

I don't think he said that.  I think he suggested that Tony's actions
be reviewed by a Board of Inquiry.

-- 
Charles Scripter   *   cescript@phy.mtu.edu
Dept of Physics, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI 49931
-------------------------------------------------------------------
With your one remaining eye, please do NOT look back into the laser
From: m0102@tnc.UUCP (FRANK NEY)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Gun control (was Re: democratic platform)
Keywords: joke, very funny, haha, etc.
Date: 18 Aug 92 14:19:15 GMT
Reply-To: m0102@tnc.UUCP (FRANK NEY)
Organization: The Next Challenge, Fairfax, Va.


To say that Bill Clinton's alleged successes as Governor of Arkansas
qualify him to be President of the US is like saying the shoeshine
stand operator in the airport is qualified to be CEO of IBM.
--
Then there's Pat Buchanan's winner last night where he said that the
sum total of Clinton's foreign policy expertise was having a meal once
at the IHOP.

[AFrank Ney N4ZHG EMT-P  LPVa NRA ILA GOA CCRTKBA "M-O-U-S-E"
Commandant and Acting President, Northern Virginia Free Militia
Send e-mail for an application and more information
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ask Rodney King if the LAPD is under control.
Ask John Lawmaster if the BATF is under control.
Ask the american people if the government is under control.
Ask yourself what you plan to do about it.
-- 
The Next Challenge - Public Access Unix in Northern Va. - Washington D.C.
703-803-0391 To log in for trial and account info.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: smpod@venus.lerc.nasa.gov (Stefan)
Subject: Re: FREE 1-YEAR NRA... enough allready!!
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: who knows
Distribution: usa
Date: 14 Aug 1992 13:19 EDT  

cthong@fraser.sfu.ca (Christopher Thong) writes...
>(James Douglas Del-Vecchio) writes:
>>...
>>	As for the rights/need argument.   Rights are the things you
>>don't have to justify with "need".  When a police officer wants to look 
>>around in your house w/o a warrant, you don't say no because you "need" 
>>privacy, you say no because it is your house.  
> 
Doesn't this sound like
>you've got something in your place that you don't want the authorities
>to see? look.. i plan on signing on with my country's police force
>next time. and it's RIGHTS like this that would make my job of keeping
>the peace and ensuring public safety more DIFFICULT than it already is.

You seem to have the police-state mentality that many police have.

Rights! 
What rights? !
I don't need no damn rights!

:-(
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: veal@utkux1.utk.edu (David Veal)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: FREE 1-YEAR NRA... enough allready!!
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 22:08:39 GMT
Organization: University of Tennessee Division of Continuing Education
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: leviathan.ce.utk.edu

In article <cthong.713769656@sfu.ca> cthong@fraser.sfu.ca (Christopher Thong) writes:

>.....and as a last note on s'poreans'  lack of freedom  and having an anal 
>retentive  govt.....
>my american friend.....  we have lee kuan yew.
>you should read up on him.
>you on the other hand have to choose between  BUSH and CLINTON....
>heh....
>

     No, as a matter of fact, we don't.
 

===========================================================================
|David Veal  PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu  University of Tennessee             |  
|                                     Division of Continuing Education    |
===========================================================================
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: FREE 1-YEAR NRA... enough allready!!
Date: 19 Aug 92 23:12:52 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <cthong.714252777@sfu.ca>, cthong@fraser.sfu.ca (Christopher Thong) writes:
> >>>Ah.  You're from the place which has a leadership that's so
> >>>anal-retentive, it has outlawed CHEWING GUM.

> you make it seem like it's either a personal thing or something bad.
> firstly , it affected ALL manufacturers of the gum ,  not just american 
> gum makers . 

Oh, OK.  Screwing ALL of them is better than screwing only SOME of them.

> secondly , people like you will never understand that 
> responsibility has to be taken for every decision and mistake.

The subway engineers screw up, and the gum manufacturers are "responsible."

> i can live with having to restict my intake of gum in order to have a 
> smooth running system . you tell me how you feel the next time you have 
> a wad of it on your soles or fingers...

God, I am SO GLAD that your politicians have the GUTS to take on these
life or death issues!

Over here, the goddamn government abandons us to wash our hands all by
ourselves.
-- 

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: donb@igor.tamri.com (Don Baldwin)
Subject: Re: No charges filed in SWAT killing
Organization: TOSHIBA America MRI, South San Francisco, CA
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 18:37:32 GMT

In article <viking.714181082@vincent1.iastate.edu> viking@iastate.edu
(Dan Sorenson) writes:
>>     Maybe we should take a good long look at the way the police work:  
>>maybe they shouldn't work like they do.
>
>	They shouldn't _have_ to, but the days of the possee and the
>sheriff deputizing a band of armed men at the saloon to get Pecos Bill
>are long gone, and citizens are no longer as active in enforcing the
>law.  Thus, it falls on the police to enforce the laws alone, and given
>the opposition they can be expected to face, I cannot help but feel that
>the present organization is what is necessary.  That doesn't mean I like
>it, or that I agree with all of their procedures, but I can think of
>no method of changing it that will me more effective in crime control.

Hey Dan,

Maybe we need to cchange our ideas regarding how "effective" we want the
police to be.  For example, I'd rather see some car thieves get away than
have an unarmed one shot be the police for fleeing.  I'd rather have
them lose out on some drug busts (for as long as this idiotic War on
Drugs continues) because they get flushed, rather than continue to
allow masked SWAT team members to stage a no-knock bust.

What do you think?

   don

Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: hes@unity.ncsu.edu (Henry E. Schaffer)
Subject: Re: No charges filed in SWAT killing
Organization: Computing Center, North Carolina State University
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 01:47:06 GMT

In article <1992Aug17.191058.613@news.yale.edu> swatt%mickey@net.yale.edu (Alan Watt) writes:
>This reminds me of an old Matt Helm novel by Donald Hamilton  ...

  I've enjoyed these, particularly since the firearms descriptions
and usage are generally very sensible and accurate.  If you like
espionage adventure and haven't read this, they're worth a try.

--henry schaffer  n c state univ
From: osan@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (Mr. X)
Subject: Re: Support to Protect 2nd Amendment
Organization: Twilight Zone
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 21:14:05 GMT

In article <1992Aug17.123616.17826@linus.mitre.org> m15133@mwvm.mitre.org (Graham K. Glover) writes:
>
>"What do you get for pretending the danger's not real?"  
>

	Uh, gee lemme see... I'd have to say that meek an obedient, you
	follow the leader down well trodden corridors into the valley of
	steel.  But I *could* be wrong.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: mpetro@brtph126.bnr.ca (Myron Petro P030)
Subject: Re: Guns, and the necessity to trust our governement.
Organization: BNR, Inc. Research Triangle Park, NC
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 18:07:10 GMT

 starbuck wrote:
>It's thinking like your statement above that motivated me to become one of
>the 1500 new members a day of the NRA since the LA riots.

 Welcome, to both the NRA and t.p.g  If you have any questions concerning
firearms or related check out rec.guns .  

    Myron
  NRA, IPSC


 ***************************************************************

 The opinions included in this post are my sole responsibility.
 And are protected by the First Ammendment and guarnteed by the 
 Second.   
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,rec.motorcycles
From: andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman)
Subject: Re: Gun control in California
Followup-To: rec.motorcycles
Organization: Computer Science Department,  Stanford University.
Distribution: ca
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 17:20:17 GMT

In article <36941@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> djohnson@cs.ucsd.edu (Darin Johnson) writes:
>>Like the helmet bill, they didn't actually care about "trivia"
>>like whether or not their claims were true or not.
>
>Helmet law?  You mean the claims are wrong, and responsible drivers
>are safe on motorcycles without a helmet?  Wow...

The claim was that the "public" was spending a disproportionate amount
of money saving motorcycle riders.  It's a plausible argument, but it
happens to be wrong.

As to whether or not one can safely ride without a helmet, I'll let
the folks in rec.motorcycles discuss that with Johnson.  I'll just
point out that it is ILLEGAL for car drivers to wear a helmet, and the
reason given for that restriction is that a helmet interferes with
their sight and hearing.  I wonder why Johnson thinks that helmets
don't have that effect on motorcycle riders.

-andy
--
UUCP:    {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA:    andy@cs.stanford.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu  (David Veal)
Subject: Re: Gun control (was Re: democratic platform)
Organization: The University of Tennessee, Knoxville
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 05:07:46 GMT

In article <14138@auspex-gw.auspex.com>
johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:

>
>In article <1992Aug18.020612.7417@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> andy@SAIL.StanfordEDU (Andy Freeman) writes:
>|In article <14106@auspex-gw.auspex.com> johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes
>|>Hmmm. Did they have rocket launchers and semi-automatic rifles when the
>|>second amendment was passed?  Just wondering?
>|
>|They had rocket launchers and they had "shoot lots of times with out
>|any user action" guns long before the American Revolution.  Semi-auto
>|is a relatively modern idea, say 1870 or so.  (Repeaters, even those
>|that work by pulling the trigger repeatedly, predate semi-autos.)
>
>Really?  What do they hunt with them?
>
     They didn't hunt anything with them.  That is why people flinch when
Clinton and others spout "legitimate hunting purpose."  While hunting
and sport was indeed a factor, it was not why the second amendment was
encated.

>I can really be a pain in the ass sometimes...

     Yes...

========================================================================
| David Veal  PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu                                  |
|             University of Tennessee Division of Continuing Education |
========================================================================
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: meyers@rtp.dg.com (Bill Meyers)
Subject: Designed To Kill  :-)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 92 19:51:07 GMT
Organization: N/I

From "The Lighter Side" catalog (Box 25600, Bradenton, FL 34206), p. 33:
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                    NEW!  Screaming Fly Swatter

        Nab those pesky critters with an hilarious swatter that
        lets out a blood-curdling scream when you slap them.
        Adds some fun and excitement to a springtime ritual --
        fly swatting!  Fully functional as a swatter:  big com-
        fortable handle.  Requires 2 "AAA" batteries.  17" long.

        5479  Screaming Fly Swatter . . . . . . . . . . . . $12.95
                                    2 or more, $11.95 each
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: cthong@fraser.sfu.ca (Christopher Thong)
Subject: Re: FREE 1-YEAR NRA... enough allready!!
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 04:57:55 GMT

thank you for taking time off to explain things to me from an objective point 
of view. i see your point . laws would be difficult to enforce in an area like
that . but to ask a last question of you - what makes you think you aren't 
imposing YOUR points of view on others in YOUR country?
are you the majority?
or just the vocal part of your country that wants to or isn't afraid to speak
up?
have you asked aLL your neighbours?
or have you all been assuming that since thats the way things have always
been then it must still be that way?
for a country with freedom of speech , i find that any contrary opinions
here are more subject to branding of deviance than mine...
after all , that was part of the basis for McCarthyism weren't it ?
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Gun control (was Re: democratic platform)
Keywords: joke, very funny, haha, etc.
Date: 18 Aug 92 23:36:32 GMT
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <1992Aug18.020612.7417@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman) writes:
|In article <14106@auspex-gw.auspex.com> johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
|>Hmmm. Did they have rocket launchers and semi-automatic rifles when the
|>second amendment was passed?  Just wondering?
|
|They had rocket launchers and they had "shoot lots of times with out
|any user action" guns long before the American Revolution.  Semi-auto
|is a relatively modern idea, say 1870 or so.  (Repeaters, even those
|that work by pulling the trigger repeatedly, predate semi-autos.)

Really?  What do they hunt with them?

I can really be a pain in the ass sometimes...

-- 
+============================================================================++
| John Fereira            "Is that all you ever think about?"                |
| johnf@auspex.com                                                           |
+============================================================================++
Xref: sparky talk.politics.guns:19459 talk.politics.animals:7208
From: spp@zabriskie.berkeley.edu (Steve Pope)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,talk.politics.animals
Subject: Re: PETA Activities Suspected of Violating FCC Act, Says PPF
Date: 18 Aug 92 17:53:30 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: U.C. Berkeley -- ERL
NNTP-Posting-Host: zabriskie.berkeley.edu

||Note that the "New Gun Week" article talks first about some
||clearly illegal actions (arson), then sort of blends into a
||discussion of this 800 number business with an attempt
||to lull the reader into thinking that this, too, is illegal.
||Which of course it isn't. [spp@berkeley]

|However, I do recall an individual with a computerized dialer who
|used this tactic against Jerry Falwell's "Moral Majority." Not only
|was he told to cease and desist, he was ordered to pay $10s of thousands
|of dollars to the "Moral Majorty."
|
|This tactic was also used against a firm that sold para-military
|equipment [I believe the firm was called PARRALAX; may have been
|Illinois based.] It drove up their expenses so much they were forced
|to drop their 800 number. [rats@att]

Not being a legal expert, I am speculating a bit, but I would
imagine the intent to clog up the phone lines -- as opposed to
simply using the phone lines for their intended purpose of 
registering complaints -- would have to be proved before the 
phone-bombing would be considered illegal.

Part of what is going on here is that the false media image of
animal advocates (irrational, prone to illegal acts, etc.)
is being projected on to the situation.  If, for example, 
the Disabled Veterans or some such mounted a similar phone
campaign they would be viewed as within their rights.  But because
it's animal advocates, the brainwashed public thinks it must
be illegal.

Steve
From: damiel@netcom.com (Paul Theodoropoulos)
Subject: Re: Kates preparing class action suit against LAPD
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 92 05:32:48 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Keywords: Kates, CCW
Distribution: usa
X-Spook-Fodder: hero heroin tree shrub bush birth life death FBI CIA NSA

In <1992Aug14.023645.11883@cbnews.cb.att.com> lvc@cbnews.cb.att.com (Larry Cipriani) writes:
>People who have a special interest in a class action suit against
>the LAPD for failing to issue CCW permits, and would like to
>participate as plaintiffs or have other cause and standing, are
>invited to write:

>	Don B. Kates, Jr.
>	920 Arlene Way
>	Navatto, CA  94947
        ^^^^^^^

Thats   Novato.

-- 
paul theodoropoulos                          damiel@netcom.com
From: gross@nssdca.gsfc.nasa.gov (Walter Douglas Gross)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Guns, Motorcycles etc. in Paris - Requested Translation
Keywords: translation
Date: 19 Aug 92 01:01:00 GMT
Organization: NASA - Goddard Space Flight Center
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

>>>  D'apres ce que j'en sais. Il y a deux cas possibles: soit cette arme n'est
>>>pas destinee a etre transportee (stockee a domicile, par ex), et dans ce cas,
>	(french text deleted)
>>Tu sais, plusieurs de mes ancetres ont ete asphyxies par les Nazis; quant a
>>ma tante, elle a ete violee et tuee par quelque salaud.  Moi, j'aimerais
>>bien qu'ils eussent une arme quelconque afin d'etre capable de se defendre
>>pendant ces temps-la...
> 
>	Could someone translate this for the French impared?
                                                    |
                                                    impaired (ahem)

The whole thing???  Dieudoyardaise!!  But in case it was just the last
paragraph you wanted:

"You know, several of my ancestors were gassed by the Nazis; and
my aunt, she was raped and killed by some filthy bastard.  I sure wish 
they might have had a weapon of some sort, to be able to defend 
themselves at those times..."
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,talk.politics.animals
From: rats@cbnewsc.cb.att.com (Morris the Cat)
Subject: Re: PETA Activities Suspected of Violating FCC Act, Says PPF
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 14:09:20 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.guns,talk.politics.animals


|Note that the "New Gun Week" article talks first about some
|clearly illegal actions (arson), then sort of blends into a
|discussion of this 800 number business with an attempt
|to lull the reader into thinking that this, too, is illegal.
|Which of course it isn't.

However, I do recall an individual with a computerized dialer who
used this tactic against Jerry Falwell's "Moral Majority." Not only
was he told to cease and desist, he was ordered to pay $10s of thousands
of dollars to the "Moral Majorty."

This tactic was also used against a firm that sold para-military
equipment [I believe the firm was called PARRALAX; may have been
Illinois based.] It drove up their expenses so much they were forced
to drop their 800 number.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns