HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: amirza@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Anmar Caves)
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 17:11:54 GMT

In article <9301051955.18@rmkhome.UUCP> rmkhome!rmk@merk.com (Rick Kelly) writes:
>In article <pa142548.604.726244364@utkvm1.utk.edu> pa142548@utkvm1.utk.edu (T. Archer) writes:
>>In article <9301021347.42@rmkhome.UUCP> rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:
>>>So, do you carry a gun 24 hours a day?
>>>
>>When I was a Georgia resident I did.  Here in Tennessee, private citizens 
>>can't get carry permits.
>
>When you were living in Georgia, how often did you have to pull a gun and/or
>shoot at somebody?

What kind of question is this?  I've never had to pull my gun, much
the same as I've never had a claim on my automobile insurance, my
medical insurance, had someone break into my house, etc.  Since I
obviously don't need insurance, I shouldn't carry it right?  Is that
your point?  Since you didn't state one, we must assume. ^
							 |
Heavy, heavy sarcasm--------------------------------------

-- 
Anmar Mirza   # Chief of Tranquility  #My Opinions! NotIU's!#Purveyor of
EMT-D         # Base, Lawrence Co. IN # Legalize Explosives!#nontraditional
N9ISY (tech)  # Somewhere out on the  # Politicians prefer  #family values
Networks Tech.# Mirza Ranch.C'mon over# unarmed peasants.   #Space For Rent
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
Date: 11 Jan 93 18:45:56 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: rocket.sw.stratus.com

In article <9301092234.38@rmkhome.UUCP>, rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:

> One of the amusing rules of the Massachusetts carry permit for the Protection
> of Life and Property requires that it MUST be concealed.  A friend of mine
> had a hard time with this, as you tend to have to overdress in the summer.

> It's pretty hard to conceal an average size handgun unless you wear a
> sportcoat all the time or baggy pants.

Or a fanny-pack, purse, portfolio, briefcase, backpack... there are a
number of places that make high-class leather accessories with special 
pockets for handguns, plus the usual compartments.  There's one right 
in Wellesley (or is it Wayland?)  Check out "Women & Guns" magazine.
-- 

cdt@rocket.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: hes@unity.ncsu.edu (Henry E. Schaffer)
Subject: Re: The real gamble of self-defense with a gun
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 03:09:53 GMT

In article <1993Jan13.000831.2532@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman) writes:
>In article <1it58vINNgbq@flash.pax.tpa.com.au> anon.526@pax.tpa.com.au writes:
>> ...
>>because most homicides have no planning whatsoever and arise from
>>verbal arguments.
>
>As opposed to those that arise from written arguments?   ...

  Not that - "verbal" encompasses written and oral words - so it is
opposed to those which use some other manner of transmitting the
argument - perhaps our anon poster is referring to "Dueling Banjos"
as seldom causing homocides?

--henry schaffer

P.S. The Wash. DC police have attributed over half of the murder rate
there to the drug trade.  I would consider all of those murders to
have been "planned" in the broad sense.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: jkapson@ad-29.Naitc.Com (John Kapson)
Subject: Identifying felons (was Re: Dressed for Rape)
Organization: AC Nielsen Co., Bannockburn IL
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 93 15:05:56 GMT

In article <1993Jan8.134826.18087@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> bobd@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Bob DeBula) writes:
>
>You know, this whole thread started me thinking. If we turned
>this about and proposed the following, I wonder how many of
>the pro gun control far-left-wing crowd would approve:
>
>- When someone is *convicted* of a felony, confiscate their
>  drivers license or state ID card. 
>
>- Issue them a new drivers license or state ID card with a
>  big red circled gun with a slash through it. Actually,
>  there would be no need to issue the drivers license
>  or state id card until their release from prison.

Nah, let's just tattoo "Ex-con" across their forehead.

                8-)  8-)  8-)  8-)  8-)  8-)

P.S.  Does anyone have a source for the quote I've stuffed in my .sig?

+-----------------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
|      John Kapson      | "1935 will go down in history!  For the first time, |
| NRA               ILA | a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our   |
| jkapson@nis.naitc.com | streets will be safer, our police more efficient    |
|                       | and the world will follow our lead into the         |
|                       | future!"  - Adolf Hitler                            |
+-----------------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
|                  PGP Public Key available via email                         |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: jgreely@morganucodon.cis.ohio-state.edu (J Greely)
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
Originator: jgreely@morganucodon.cis.ohio-state.edu
Organization: Ohio State University Computer and Information Science
	<9301061627.25@rmkhome.UUCP>
	<JGREELY.93Jan7132456@morganucodon.cis.ohio-state.edu>
	<9301092315.08@rmkhome.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 19:06:21 GMT

In article <9301092315.08@rmkhome.UUCP> rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:
>The question, then, is how does the state govern the sale of weapons
>to law-abiding citizens while keeping felons from not having them
>and at the same time not infringing on anybodies rights?

No, the question is, "how does the state restrict possession of
weapons by known felons while not infringing on citizen's rights".
Any restrictions placed on sale to law-abiding citizens, except those
that can be reasonably shown to be relevant to the problem of
over-the-counter purchases by known felons, are nothing but control
games.  Gun safety is basically a non-issue here, as many people have
posted references to.

>For one thing, I don't see anyone here talking about how to get rid
>of blackmarket guns.  Everyone here seems to ignore that problem.

I haven't seen you *ask* about that problem; mostly it seems that
you're inventing positions to argue against, and ignoring statements
that don't fit in (that is, the majority).  The fact that pro-control
groups largely ignore it to concentrate on law-abiding citizens says a
lot about them.

>After this particular accident, I disassembled the Walther.  It was poorly
>machined and had burrs and rough edges where there shouldn't have been any.

Thank you for actually supplying information.  I was starting to worry
that your posted articles were not true "follow ups".  I questioned
the statement in part because the user was so desperately clueless
(and because all the Walthers I've seen have been very well-made).


			"The suspect was clearly an unbalanced
			 psycho... so many kids today are.  I suspect
			 he was a Satanist too, a belief he probably
			 picked up by reading those comic books."
-- 
J Greely (jgreely@cis.ohio-state.edu; osu-cis!jgreely)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: pecampbe@mtu.edu (Paul Campbell)
Subject: Re: Traveling with a gun
Organization: Michigan Technological University
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 06:56:11 GMT

In article <1993Jan7.103304.23247@news.cs.indiana.edu> "John Simmons" <simmonsj@cs.indiana.edu> writes:
>In article <C0EK1t.Hw1@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> amirza@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Anmar Caves) writes:
>>For the most part, but they [Michigan] will allow me to use my Indiana permit
>>there.
>
>I've often wondered about this: do states recognize each other's carry
>permits?  Do all (doubtful)?  Do some (maybe)?  How does one find out?
>
>I've heard it said that some states will not even allow police from
>other states to carry while visiting their jurisdiction.

This is ludicrous. The constitution REQUIRES them to recognize the
laws and proceedings of other states.
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
Date: 7 Jan 1993 17:48:43 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: rocket.sw.stratus.com

In article <93006.235430GUNDEVIL@ASUACAD.BITNET>, Shooting Club at ASU <GUNDEVIL@ASUACAD.BITNET> writes:
> 
> Arizona Constitution:  Article II, Section 26
> 
> "The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of
> himself or the state shall not be impaired, but nothing in this
> section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or
> corporations to organize, maintain, or employ an armed body of
> men."

This is phrased in an interesting manner.  It implies that you can't
hire bodyguard(s) to defend you -- you have to do it yourself!
-- 

cdt@rocket.sw.stratus.com   --If you believe that I speak for my company,
OR cdt@vos.stratus.com        write today for my special Investors' Packet...
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Fight the bastards (was Re: Dressed for Rape)
Date: 7 Jan 1993 21:32:18 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: rocket.sw.stratus.com

In article <9301052005.00@rmkhome.UUCP>, rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:

> >>>How would you obtain the data you need to make a decision?  
> >>
> >>FBI report
> >>State police and court report
> >>verifiable references of friends and/or neighbors
> >
> >So citizens should ask the state and their friends and neighbors before 
> >exercizing basic civil liberties.
> 
> So you see nothing wrong with allowing ex-cons on parole from buying
> guns, even if their crimes involved guns.

So you believe that the police are unable to accurately determine your 
criminal history or parole status without relying on the testimony of 
your neighbors.

> If you want to become a police officer in Massachusetts, they also check
> FBI and state records, and talk to your friends and neighbors.

How nice.  And yet, becoming a police officer is not a constitutionally
protected civil right.

> Obviously, the federal government doesn't protect the constitution,
> considering the laws that all these states have enacted.

Not to mention the ones they enact all by themselves.

> >>>If you make the wrong decision, what would your responsibility be?
> >>
> >>None, under current laws.
> >
> >So you can freely deny civil liberties with no penalty.
> 
> That seems to be how it works for the police.

I'll assume this statement indicates that you may actually be learning 
something.
-- 

cdt@rocket.sw.stratus.com   --If you believe that I speak for my company,
OR cdt@vos.stratus.com        write today for my special Investors' Packet...

Xref: sparky talk.politics.guns:25920 alt.society.civil-liberty:7237
From: peercy@crhc.uiuc.edu (Mike Peercy)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,alt.society.civil-liberty
Subject: Re: This organ donating thread
Date: 4 Jan 1993 15:46:18 -0600
Organization: Center for Reliable and High-Performance Computing, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
NNTP-Posting-Host: cairo.crhc.uiuc.edu

VEAL@utkvm1.utk.edu (David Veal) writes:

| sean@cae.wisc.edu (Sean Rutledge) writes:

| >The solution is simple.  Allow people to sell their organs.  Pay people for
| >the
| >right to take their organs when they die.  

|        Consider this:  If your organs are an asset with a dollar value,
| what happens when you go into bankruptcy?

Well, firstly, I should expect the common law or statutes to protect
your right to keep your organs while you still live even if the law
permits placing a lien on them.  Furthermore, I would sincerely hope
that organs would be considered marketable assets only if it was
desired by their possessor.

The sticking point comes if one has already guaranteed the sale of her
organs.  Can a lien be placed on that future earning of the estate?
I'd say it's highly likely.

But, to answer your question "what happens when you go into
bankruptcy?", what happens is that your family can now keep their
clothes, car, or home because you have willfully given up organs
you no longer need to decrease your debt.

In other words, a lot of people will be a lot better off because you
are allowed to sell your organs.  And no one will be worse off.  What
exactly is the problem?

    Every man has a property in his own person.  This nobody has any
    right to but himself.
					John Locke

Mike Peercy
peercy@crhc.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: jkapson@ad-29.Naitc.Com (John Kapson)
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
Organization: AC Nielsen Co., Bannockburn IL
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 15:52:47 GMT

In article <9301092228.53@rmkhome.UUCP> rmkhome!rmk@merk.com (Rick Kelly) writes:
>In article <ARCHER.648.726424779@utkvm1.utk.edu> ARCHER@utkvm1.utk.edu (T. Archer) writes:
>>In article <9301051928.44@rmkhome.UUCP> rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:
>>>There is slightly more to it than that.
>>
>>What?  I've been handling firearms for over two decades and I have yet to 
>>put a hole in anything that the barrel wasn't pointed at.
>
>I can say the same thing, myself, but I've seen other people who weren't
>quite so lucky.

Luck has _nothing_ to do with it.

+-----------------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
|      John Kapson      |                                                     |
| NRA               ILA |      "...to disarm the people (is) the best         |
| jkapson@nis.naitc.com |      and most effective way to enslave them..."     |
|                       |      George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 380         |
|                       |                                                     |
+-----------------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
|                  PGP Public Key available via email                         |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: rcanders@nyx.cs.du.edu (Rod Anderson)
Subject: Re: The NRA will always be right wing.
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 93 18:44:04 GMT

In article <1ikgh3INNp26@flash.pax.tpa.com.au> anon.526@pax.tpa.com.au writes:
>
>Don Baldwin laments that the gun lobby is weighed down with the label
>of hard-core conservative.
>
>Here is some advice:  Give up.  The NRA will always be right wing.
>I doubt that any NRA directors are losing any sleep over Colorado
>Amendment 2.  Maybe one or two of them have some closeted qualms.
>The other 90 or so (or however many there are) think that fags
>deserve no sympathy.  If you don't believe it, ask Wayne LaPierre
>how many homosexuals there are in the NRA.
>

Homosexuals are welcome to join the NRA.  I am sure that the NRA respects
the gays right of self defense. 

>In case you missed it, the NRA attacked one of its enemies in Colorado
>last year by raising the issue of flag burning.  Guess which side it
>was on.
>
>It is true that the GOP has been seriously damaged by its reactionary
>posterior.  The NRA is a big part of its problem.  The GOP is either going
>to go down the toilet, or ax the NRA and other fanatics in the party,
>or both.

Not after Slick Willie does a Jimmy Carter on the economy.

>
>Brought to you by the Society for Preservation of Human Life.
>                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Am I correct that this is an anti abortion organization?
  
>--
>** Anonymity & Privacy by PAX - Public Access Unix (Adelaide,South Australia) **

 
I am glad you showed the courage of your conviction by signing your post.

Rod Anderson     rcanders@nyx.cs.du.edu
From: osan@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (Mr. X)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
Date: 6 Jan 93 17:32:52 GMT
Organization: Twilight Zone

In article <9301051937.44@rmkhome.UUCP> rmkhome!rmk@merk.com (Rick Kelly) writes:
>
>I wonder how this would be treated in the workplace.  I suspect that
>companies would be able to ban guns from the premises.  So you leave
>your gun out in your car for the crooks.

	Please forgive me for saying so, but WOW... what a gruesome lack of
	imagination.  No wonder America is well on its way to Hell in a
	handbasket!  Ever hear of a coat check?  Employees that carry could 
	check their weapons at the door when they arrive in the morning.

	AT&T hs a very clear policy about guns on their premises: Can't.
	Even so, a person I know, let's call him Mr. X, once forgot to
	remove his pistols from his car the night before when he was at
	the range.  He took the weapons from the car and gave them to the
	security guards, explaining what had happened.  They were a bit
	taken aback at first, given the policies, but saw no harm in 
	keeping the weapons safely in the security office for the duration
	of the workday.  At day's end, X picked up his weapons and strolled 
	home merrily.

	Personally, if I ran a company, I'd encourage my employees to bring
	their arms to work.  In fact, I'd probably build a range on site for 
	them to use off hours.  But that's me.

	-Andy V.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu (David Veal)
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
Organization: University of Tennessee Division of Continuing Education
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 16:12:53 GMT

In article <9301041915.56@rmkhome.UUCP> rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:

>In article <16B4AEBCC.PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu> PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu (David Veal) writes:
>>In article <9301021313.22@rmkhome.UUCP>
>>rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:
>>
>>>In article <1992Dec31.194027.1838@cbnewse.cb.att.com> random@cbnewse.cb.att.com(David L. Pope) writes:
>>>>> The police would like to know who has guns.
>>>>  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>>
>>>>And it is our duty to restrict that knowledge.
>>>
>>>Why is that?
>>
>>       The same reason we don't require the police be informed for
>>every object that could be used as a deadly weapon.  Because it's
>>none of their business unless I use that object in a crime.  As
>>agents of the government, the police should be watched closely.  When
>>they get to keep records of everything that *might* develop into a crime,
>>they might start thinking it's their job to jump in whenever somebody
>>has the capability to commit a crime, rather than when they actually do.
>>       In fact, it's already happened.  My favority being the quote
>>from a Florida police officer on the war on drugs and civil forfeiture.
>>He said, "When you take away someone's money, you take away their
>>ability to purchase narcotics"
>>       As someone who A) has money, and B) has never purchased narcotics
>>I find this very, very scary.  What, then, if they decide that can
>>prevent shootings by confiscating guns, beating by confiscating baseball
>>bats, and child abuse by confiscating children?
>>       And where exactly did good intentions turn into a police state?
>
>This could easily be an anti vehicle registration and insurance debate.

        Bingo.

        Vehicle registration is primarily a revenue generatining thing above
and beyond anything else.  This is apparent even more in those states where
you have to register a car and pay taxes on it even if you aren't going to
use it on public roads.  (Thank heavens not here in Tennessee.)

>Just remember when taking money out of the bank as cash that the government
>believes that only drug dealers use $100 bills.  

        *Gag*  Right, I'll use $20s.  (Did you know *another* profile
is that drug dealers pay in cash with small bills to avoid being noticed?)

>A withdrawal of as little
>as $1000 can get you silently reported to the government if you take it as
>$100 bills.

        Thank you, I know what the situation is.  Apparently I'm supposed
to get my cash however the government decides to let me get my cash on
any particular day or risk being thrown in prison for several days and 
having my money confiscated and never returned.

        You *approve* of this?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Veal               University of Tennessee Div. of Cont. Education
                         Information Services Group
PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu  (Mail to VEAL@utkvm1.utk.edu will bounce.)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: ARCHER@utkvm1.utk.edu (T. Archer)
Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
Organization: University of Tennessee 
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 19:48:35 GMT

In article <9301092149.44@rmkhome.UUCP> rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:
>Path: utkux1.utk.edu!cs.utk.edu!gatech!rutgers!ub!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!psinntp!alliant!merk!rmkhome!rmk
>From: rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly)
>Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
>Subject: Re: Dressed for Rape
>Message-ID: <9301092149.44@rmkhome.UUCP>
>Date: 10 Jan 93 02:49:35 GMT
>References: <pa142548.600.726243641@utkvm1.utk.edu> <9301051928.44@rmkhome.UUCP> <C0GCDu.GIx@SSD.intel.com>
>Reply-To: rmkhome!rmk@merk.com (Rick Kelly)
>Organization: The Man With Ten Cats
>Lines: 26
>In article <C0GCDu.GIx@SSD.intel.com> hays@ssd.intel.com (Kirk Hays) writes:
>>In article <9301051928.44@rmkhome.UUCP>, rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:
>>
>>|> >>And, of course, untrained idiots who bought a gun at K-Mart would never
>>|> >>hurt themselves or anyone else by mistake.
>>|> >
>>|> >It takes one minute to train even an idiot to not hurt themselves or 
>>|> >others:  don't point the end with the hole in it at anything you don't want 
>>|> >a hole in.
>>|> 
>>|> There is slightly more to it than that.
>>
>>What else would you suggest as basic training to avoid the problem you mention
>>above?
>
>1. Effective cleaning and maintenance.
>
>2. Clearing of jams and misfires.
>
>3. A complete understanding of applicable state laws.
>
>4. And most important - how to engage and disengage the safety.

All of these are good points, but not necessary to prevent accidents.  As 
long as you don't point it at anyone, you're not going to shoot anyone.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Vote Dempublican, it's easier than thinking.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns