From: andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman)
Subject: Re: ==> Bush Empty Promises On Crime, Statement Concering
Organization: Computer Science Department,  Stanford University.
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 19:16:35 GMT

In article <92284.163736U56503@uicvm.uic.edu> <U56503@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:
>            GEORGE BUSH: MORE EMPTY PROMISES ON CRIME
>    [Statement by Bob Boorstin, Deputy Communications Director]
>
>      One week after he helped to defeat crime legislation supported
> by major law enforcement organizations throughout the country, George
> Bush had the nerve to claim he was tough on crime.  More than three
> quarters of the police officers killed in the line of duty last year
> were murdered with handguns, but George Bush won't help pass the
> Brady Bill.

Try again.  Most of the officers "killed in the line of duty" last
year died in motor vehicle accidents.  That's the way it's been for
years.  You folks really should read and think about what you send
out.  This sort of mistakes make you look stupid.

Moreover, about half of the officers killed with guns are killed with
their own guns; not even the most stupid advocates of the Brady Bill
think that it can affect that.  Oops.  We've found one who does.  Bill
Clinton apparently thinks that a waiting period will stop crooks from
killing cops with the cops' gun.  (If his press is to be believed, he
even apparently thinks that it will prevent motor vehicle accidents.)

Recently, the BATF released yet another study of where criminals get
guns.  As with previous studies, this one found that retail sales were
not a major source.  Therefore, the Brady Bill, even if it had the
provisions attributed to it by its advocates, can't provide the
promised benefits.

The Brady Bill, when introduced, didn't include a background check and
DID allow local police to arbitrarily delay or deny, without recourse,
any handgun purchase.  Bill Clinton claims that he's always supported
the Brady Bill, yet denies being a gun banner.  Oops.

Well over a year ago, the US Attorney General released a study of the
records for the criminal justice system.  It happens that the
accessible records are ALREADY on line, that records checks do NOT
require a waiting period.

Clinton's continued advocacy of waiting periods, his continued
opposition to instant checks reveals his true position, as a gun
banner, his ignorance of gun issues, or both.  Only gun ban advocates
prefer waiting periods to background checks and only the uninformed
think that background checks require waiting periods.  Which is it
Clinton?  Are you a gun banner or are you stupid?  (He could be both,
like Dewey Stokes.)

> background checks, and he'll ban military-style assault weapons so
> that our criminals are not better armed than our police.

Someone should tell Clinton that police can have ANY gun they want,
and they don't have to smuggle machine guns or have them made
illegally.  They can't be "outgunned" by criminals.  Once again, we
get a choice between "Is Clinton stupid?" and "Is Clinton lying?"  So
much for being "better than Bush".

Does Clinton really think that .223 (the cartridge used by the ar-15)
or 7.62x39 (used by the AK-47) is "more powerful" than typical US
hunting ammo like 30-06, or even 30-30?  If so, ol "hunter Bill"
should have paid more attention during his hunter safety class.
("Hunter Bill" claims to be a hunter, but there don't seem to be any
records of him having a hunting license.  Maybe he doesn't because he
didn't pay attention and failed the test.)  .223 is a 22 on steroids,
but it is still a midget compared to typical deer hunting ammo, which
uses larger and heavier bullets with significantly more kinetic
energy.  .223 isn't even legal for deer hunting in some states.
7.62x39 does use the same bullet diameter, weight, and velocity of
30-30, but that puts it on the light end of typical hunting
ammunition.

-andy
--
UUCP:    {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA:    andy@cs.stanford.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc,alt.sex,sci.skeptic