HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: meyers@leonardo.rtp.dg.com (Bill Meyers)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Invitation to NRA Freedom Associates
Date: 24 Aug 92 00:42:16 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: N/I

In article <6373@ucru2.ucr.edu> starbuck@ucrmath.ucr.edu (aaron greenwood) writes:
>In article <26720@life.ai.mit.edu> benjamin@rice-chex.ai.mit.edu (Benjamin Renaud) writes:
[ ... ]
>>A gun, like tobacco, is a government approved good which, when used as
>>directed, causes death.
>
>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.  I have never owned

Welcome, starbuck!  For anyone else interested but not quite committed,
the NRA is again offering their "Freedom Associate" program.  (Without
the hat, if you remember last year.  :-)   Briefly, you get six months
of NRA magazines (American Rifleman, American Hunter, NRAction [politics],
and InSights [juniors] -- maybe all of them for six months, maybe one of
each, I'm not sure) plus your own Freedom Associate I.D. card [egad], all
for FREE.  Plus, I'm sure, lots of junk mail asking you to join for real.
I think 1/3 of them do, which is why the NRA is so willing to do all that.

How?  Send ME your name and paper-mail address, and I'll (ahem) "nominate"
you.  Or ask your local NRA member.  Or try calling NRA, at 800/368-5714.
--------
Sen. Terry Sanford, who as Governor of North Carolina refused Police protection
to a Civil Rights march, supports your Right to Keep and Bear Sporting Goods.
From: m0102@tnc.UUCP (FRANK NEY)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: A question on U.S. Constitution
Date: 23 Aug 92 20:50:58 GMT
Reply-To: m0102@tnc.UUCP (FRANK NEY)
Distribution: na
Organization: The Next Challenge, Fairfax, Va.


> Concerning hiring a lawyer/staff to fight for RTKBA

NRA GOA and CCRTKBA already do this.  The problem is that they decide
what is worth spending money on and what is not.  

Frank 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
----------------------------------------------------------------
"...I am opposed to all attempts to license or restrict the arming of
individuals...I consider such laws a violation of civil liberty, 
subversive of democratic political institutions, and self-defeating
in their purpose."
        - Robert Heinlein, in a 1949 letter concerning "Red Planet"
-- 
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,soc.culture.french
From: hthomas@galaxy.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Henry Thomas)
Subject: Re: (was): Guns, ...(French bashing)
Reply-To: hthomas@ph.tn.tudelft.nl
Organization: TU Delft (NL) & INRIA (FR)
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 12:05:32 GMT

In article <cec2oPy00WBNM4K3EX@andrew.cmu.edu>, mf0w+@andrew.cmu.edu (Michel Fougeres) writes:
|> Excerpts From Captions of netnews.soc.culture.french:
|
|> And the "imperialistic adventure" which Claude Manoit does not know
|> about is simply the failed French war of reconquest in Indochina, which
|> started in 1946.  That war was pursued strictly with mercenaries.   The
|> French mercenaries in the "Arm'ee Coloniale" had to sign a paper stating
|>...
|> probably under the Americans.  Before the French debacle in 1954,
|> Ge'ne'ral Delattre de Tassigny had flown to the US (at least once) to
|> beg the Americans to send armaments and money to help the French (I am
|> not clear whether Delattre openly asked the Americans to send troops of
|> their own but I know that many Americans in the military were itching to
|> join the fray at that time -- to save the French from disaster.)   The
|> disaster struck anyway.


Bullshit. Une des ve'rite's, c'est que les ame'ricains ont secretement supporte' les indochinois, car ils ne voulaient plus de l'influence francaise dans cette re'gion du monde. Ca a bien marche'. Telleemnt que les indochinois se sont ensuite retourne's contre eux (le vietnam). E'galleent,m pour financer cette guerre, les services secrets ame'ricains et francais ont -- de manie`re concureente -- industrialise' tout l'artisanat de la drogue -- pour se faire des sous. Ils sont me^me rentre' en guerre ouverte




 (rassurez-vous, ce sont leurs mercenaires indige'mes qui se sont entretue's :-).

Les americains m'emmerdent. L'ultime argument qu'ils ont ont en bout de
discussion c'est de dire "we saved your asses in WWI and WWII". Bien su^r. Et
les anglais n'ont rien fait ? Les russes non plus ? J'ai habite' a Brest, a`
Lorient, Cherbourg, des villes comple`tement de'truites par les bombardiers
americains qui n'on jamais e'te' foutus de placer une bombe sur les arsenaux.
Mes les civils, par contre, c'e'tait plus facile. Les bombardiers anglais ont
perdu des hommes, parce qu'ils visaient (juste). Mais ils prenaient des
risques. Peut-e^tre est-ce parce que ils savaient ce que c'e'tait d'e^tre
bombarde's.

Bon, on se calme. Lisez-donc "Catch-22" de Joseph Heller (c'est chez Flammarion, la collection pavillons je crois). Un superbe bouquins contre la guerre, a` se rouler par terre de rire. et pour avoir froid aux tripes aussi. C'est le pendant "comique" de "A` l'ouest rien de nouveau". 

-- 
-- Henry Thomas   	e-mail: hthomas@ph.tn.tudelft.nl
T.U. Delft, Technische Natuurkunde, Lorentzweg 1, 2628 CJ Delft
Netherlands, tel: +31 (0)15-782419, fax +31 (0)15-626740
-- Art has to be Forgotten. Beauty must be Realized.	[Piet Mondriaan]
Xref: sparky talk.politics.guns:20221 talk.abortion:33703 alt.flame:12366
From: exuptr@exu.ericsson.se (exuptr@exu.ericsson.se)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,talk.abortion,alt.flame
Subject: Re: democratic platform
Date: 27 Aug 92 13:55:18 GMT
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems, Inc.

In article <2a9c0e72.crud@crud.mn.org> trashman@crud.mn.org (Barry Schwartz) writes:
>From: trashman@crud.mn.org (Barry Schwartz)
>Subject: Re: democratic platform
>Date: 27 Aug 92 01:26:00 GMT

>In article <1992Aug24.044300.8415@rotag.mi.org>
>        kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:

>]In article <76840@ut-emx.uucp> mikey@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Strider) writes:
>]>In article <1992Jul28.031212.26812@rotag.mi.org> kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
>]>      Under this maxim, if statute specifies one exception
>]>                                                 ^^^^^^^^^
>]>>     to a general rule or assumes to specify the effects of a certain
>]>>     provision, other exceptions or effects are excluded.
>]>
>]>The Second Amendment's first clause does not specify an *exception*.  
>]
>]Read the second part, nimrod: "...or assumes to specify the effect of a
>                       ^^^^^^
>Do you know what this word means, Kebbie?

>]certain provision". My point is that the intended EFFECT of the 2nd Amendment 
>]RKBA is to empower the well-regulated militia to promote the security of a
>]free state. By _expressio unius est exclusio alterius_, then, we can
>]exclude all other effects of the provision, i.e. the alleged "universal"
>]RKBA does not exist.

>Then what of the ninth amendment, Kebbin?  To wit:  "The enumeration
>in the constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny
>or disparage others retained by the people."  In other words, the RKBA
>within a well-regulated militia, enumerated within the constitution,
>does not deny a general RKBA if such a right can be established a
>priori.

>Note, by the way, that the "right to keep and bear arms" is an
>individual right, and not the group "the right to keep arms and the
>right to bear arms."

>Followups set to alt.kebbie.bang.bang.bang.



>--
>Barry Schwartz        trashman@crud.mn.org


Ever wonder where criminals stand on gun control?  If I were an armed 
robber, I would want gun control, because I could alsways steal mine, but 
the law would make my job safer and easier.  :-)
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "This must be Thursday.  I never could get the hang of Thursdays"
                                                       - D Adams
  - Patrick Taylor
    Ericsson Network Systems
    exuptr@exu.ericsson.se                       "Don't let the .se fool you"
    alternately, exuptr@ZGNews.Lonestar.Org
Xref: sparky talk.politics.guns:20179 talk.politics.animals:7440
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: 26 Aug 92 22:39:27 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: U.C. Berkeley -- ERL
NNTP-Posting-Host: zabriskie.berkeley.edu

fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (steve hix) writes:

>spp@zabriskie.berkeley.edu (Steve Pope) writes:

>>Bullshit.  Hunting license fees constitute a teeny fraction of
>>the money spent on the environment.  Are you trying to tell me
>>the budgets for EPA, Interior, and Agriculture are primarily
>>funded by hunting license fees?  I don't have the numbers in front
>>of me but I'm certain this is way off base.
>
>Guess again.
>
>The largest single source of funds for purchasing animal habitat
>for the purpose of leaving it alone, or improving it, for the
>benefit of one or more animal species come directly from hunting
>and fishing license fees, and money from hunting and fishing
>organizations.

I'm not sure our two statements are inconsistent.  Money spent
"on the environment" would seem a far broader range of
activities than money spent "purchasing animal habitiat". 

>On the other hand, most of the money spent in [ EPA, Interior ]
>goes to running a beauracracy, not actually getting anyting
>out in the field.  They're extremely inefficient in that respect,
>if still intrusive.

Sure, there's huge amount of overhead and waste.  I never
said there wasn't.  In 1990 the combined budgets of EPA and
Interior came to about $15 billion.  If this same dollar
amount was spent simply purchasing land and preserving it, we'd
all be alot happier.

Steve
From: starbuck@ucrmath.ucr.edu (aaron greenwood)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Gun Purchase Laws
Date: 30 Aug 92 21:59:50 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of California, Riverside

Is there a FAQ list for talk.politics.guns.  One question I have
is in what states can you by guns without leaving a paper trail.
In California there is a 15 day waiting period thus a record of
you purchase.  I guess what I am getting at is in what states can
you buy a gun where the state does not get involved.

starbuck
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: meyers@leonardo.rtp.dg.com (Bill Meyers)
Subject: Re: CLINTON NEW TEXT: GUN CONTROL
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 21:52:00 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: N/I

In article <1992Aug27.132038.21529@philabs.philips.com> rrw@philabs.philips.com (Roger White) writes:
[ ... ]
>Although I ain't happy about it, Bush gets my vote.  Clinton et.al. have
>already announced they're out to get us.  I ain't too thrilled about D'Amato
>here in New York either but I sure as hell ain't gonna vote for Ferraro who
>looks like she'll be running against him for the Senate seat.  Not great
>choices but what can ya do?

Rog is correct in that by the time the election rolls around, quite
often gun owners get a free choice between tweedledum and tweedledee.
Solution (or at least a chance):  be involved in the primaries, too.

Meanwhile, if Bushie _does_ win, he'll consider it proof that his
"love 'em and leave 'em" strategy for gun owners worked like a champ.
And if it worked for Bush, others will try it too, in the future.

Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,alt.society.civil-disob
From: technews@iitmax.iit.edu (Kevin Kadow)
Subject: Black Market guns
Organization: Technology News, IIT, Chicago, IL
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 92 06:43:21 GMT

It is highly unlikely that more than a few black market guns come from
guns bought legally, then transported to a state with more restrictive
laws and resold at a profit.

	A simple survey of unsavory local characters in Chicago gave the
following figures

Street price  "Gun Store" price   GUN     
  $25           $60-75              Raven P-25 auto
  $50            $100               any .380 pocket auto
 $200            $300+              .45 auto pistols
$1000            ?                  Full auto Mac-10 lookalike
$1000                               Mini-Uzi (selective fire)

(Don't ask me from whom or how I got these prices, just go down to your
nearest bar and ask around for yourself)

It's impossible to beat the street price from any legitimate source, including
gun shows (usually 20-50% less than retail). As far as I can tell, most of
the street guns come from:

THEFT! Stolen from homes, friends, parents, stores, manufacturers,
	police/military (more than  you'd think!)

Another major point is the type of guns. Semi-automatic rifles, or as the
media likes to call them "assault weapons" make up about 3% of firearm
crimes.

The most common weapon?  .38 revolver, just like the cops use.

The most popular (Cool) weapon?  9mm auto pistols, per a survey of 10
teenagers hanging out in the park down the block at 10pm.

Banning guns will be less effective than banning alcohol and other drugs
has ever been- drugs can be sniffed out & tested for, crops can be killed,
rare chemicals can be eradicated. Zinc,iron, tin, and brass are difficult to
control, and the equiptment needed can be bought at your nearest Sears.

-- 
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,alt.society.civil-disob
From: nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle)
Subject: Re: Black Market guns
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 02:59:41 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Distribution: usa

technews@iitmax.iit.edu (Kevin Kadow) writes:
>	A simple survey of unsavory local characters in Chicago gave the
>following figures

>Street price  "Gun Store" price   GUN     
>  $25           $60-75              Raven P-25 auto

       Interesting.  The Wall Street Journal claimed that the street
price of the Raven was much higher than its normal retail price, in
an article a few months back about the Raven's manufacturer.
The gun costs $13 to manufacture, they claim.  Made in USA.

       I've given up on gun control, but ammo control has possibilities.
Ammo has a shelf life.

					John Nagle
From: leone@GANDALF.SSW.COM (Bob Leone)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: RKBA - are you missing the point?
Date: 31 Aug 92 23:43:36 GMT

fcrary@ocf.berkeley.edu (Frank Crary) writes:
> I'm not sure about courts of appeals, but the Supreme Court can definitely
> overrule a jury's verdict on the basis of the evidence:
>
>"...the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to
>Law and Fact..."
>(Article Three, Section 2, United States Constitution)

Overridden by VII'th Amendment in Bill of Rights:
"...and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court
of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law."

Bob Leone (leone@gandalf.ssw.com)
(The opinions expressed are my own.)

    No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.  The strongest reason
    for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last
    resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.
	   - Thomas Jefferson, Proposal Virginia Constitution, June 1776
	     1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 (C. J. Boyd, Ed., 1950).
From: billaud@greco-prog.fr (Michel BILLAUD)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Guns, and the necessity to feed donkeys
Keywords: guns and fascism
Date: 25 Aug 92 08:02:25 GMT
Reply-To: billaud@geocub.UUCP (Michel BILLAUD)
Organization: LaBRI - Universite Bordeaux I - France

In article <5840@transfer.stratus.com> cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares) writes:
>In article <1992Aug23.230909.16628@microsoft.com>, marcmil@microsoft.com (Marc Milanini) writes:
>
>> How do you expect gangsters not to be able to buy weapons if regular
>> citizens are allowed to do so ?
>
>Do you allow felons to vote where you come from?  No?  Well, if regular
>citizens are allowed to vote, how do you stop them?

If you allow Poitou donkeys to eat your hay, how do you stop
other donkeys to do so ?

Yes, I'm also reasoning by analogy..

M Billaud
-- 
Michel BILLAUD                 :  billaud@geocub.greco-prog.fr
Departement d'Informatique     :  phone W: 56.84.57.92  // 56.84.69.22
IUT "A", Universite Bordeaux I :  "Je veux jouer de l'helicon
33405 Talence  (FRANCE)        :        pon pon pon pon !    "
From: kossack@owlnet.rice.edu (Jordan Marc Kossack)
Subject: Re: CLINTON NEW TEXT: GUN CONTROL
Reply-To: kossack@qvi.com
Organization: Sam Houston Irregulars 
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 02:37:33 GMT

In article <1992Aug27.132038.21529@philabs.philips.com> rrw@philabs.philips.com (Roger White) writes:
- Oh yeah, that makes a whole lot of sense.  In order to send Bush a message,
- vote for Marrou so that it's a sure thing for Clinton who you KNOW is gonna
- screw you!  At least with Bush as president we have a chance.

	Ha.  If I were to vote for Bush, I would be condoning his 
   anti-BoR activities and his oathbreaking.  Contrary to what you 
   say, I KNOW that Bush is ready, willing and able to "screw" me, 
   whereas I only suspect the same of Clinton.  If I were the type 
   to be motivated by expedience, rather than conscience, I would 
   vote for Clinton, rather than Bush, based on their past deeds.
   Fortunately, I have other choices, such as Marrou. 

	As an aside, which is greater - the number of anti-firearm 
   bills that Bush has vetoed or the number he has ok-ed?  OBTW, he 
   doesn't get credit for vetoing bills that don't make it out of 
   congress.  After all, even "Slick Willie" can't sign those bills. 
                                                           

- Although I ain't happy about it, Bush gets my vote.  Clinton et.al. have
- already announced they're out to get us.  I ain't too thrilled about D'Amato
- here in New York either but I sure as hell ain't gonna vote for Ferraro who
- looks like she'll be running against him for the Senate seat.  Not great
- choices but what can ya do?

	Vote your conscience.   

-- 
 Jordan M Kossack  |  If I must choose between righteousness and peace, 
  kossack@qvi.com  |  I choose righteousness.  
  +1 713 240 2073  |                             -- Theodore Roosevelt
From: ghm@ccadfa.cc.adfa.oz.au (Geoff Miller)
Subject: Re: Guns, and the necessity to trust our governement.
Organization: Australian Defence Force Academy, Canberra, Australia
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 02:44:44 GMT

claude@isle.Eng.Sun.COM (Claude Manoit) writes:

>And for the Europeans: with the EEC normalizing all the rules and
>regulations and opening the borders, the question of gun-control
>must be addressed somewhere. Or maybe not (I doubt any thing so precise
>would be in the Maastritch treaty). Any fact?

There were a number of proposals emanating from Brussels, which basically
appeared to be a combination of the most restrictive parts of the
legislation of each of the member countries, and these were discussed
at length in the UK target-shooting journals.  I have not seen anything
recently, so if anyone can provide up-to-date information it would be
useful.

Geoff Miller (g-miller@adfa.oz.au)  |   Don't steal.  The government
Computer Centre                     |   hates competition.
Australian Defence Force Academy    |   (via Jeff Cooper)
Xref: sparky talk.politics.guns:20238 alt.politics.clinton:3264
From: joan@koala.berkeley.edu ()
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Premeditated Murder - Part 3
Date: 29 Aug 1992 20:00:35 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: koala.berkeley.edu


[snip]

]>The theoretical answer here is simple.  Separate the suspect from the 
]>innocents before he has time to know what is going on.
]>
]>>How many criminals have killed their wife and children in a bid to
]>>avoid arrest?  I'd bet it's less than the number of innocents killed in
]>>no-knocks.
]>
]>Maybe.  There is a similar situation going on in Idaho, I think it is.  So 
]>far the 'slow' approach has killed one federal marshal and one 13 year old 
]>boy.  We're at 8 days and counting in the standoff.  The guy still
]>has at least one more kid and wife hostage.  Don't see much improvement here.
]>
]>Rick.

	Latest word on the tv is that the federals killed the wife at
the same time they killed the boy, which was also the same time someone
in the house killed the fed. marshal.

Joan V


Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
From: russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence)
Subject: Re: Game Management Policies
Organization: WP Group
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 03:23:53 GMT

In <Btx1w2.3ps@wpg.com> russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) writes:
rl> Meanwhile, please address my previous question.  If a particular 
rl> hunter has sought to influence the sort of practices that 
rl> effectively increase deer fertility while destabilizing the food 
rl> supply, isn't it hypocritical for the same man to turn around the 
rl> following winter and cite "overpopulation" as an ethical excuse 
rl> for hunting?  

From article <viking.715389449@vincent1.iastate.edu>, by viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson):
ds> I don't see anything hypocritical about it, providing the hunter 
ds> is up-front in stating his desire to hunt. 

We're talking about a man who justifies his hunting on the basis
of the alleged threat of deer starvation.  Don't you think it's
hypocritical for such a man to cite starvation as a moral excuse
for deer hunting, while promoting practices that increase the
likelihood of starvation in the first place?

ds> ...
ds> I see this like the angler who lets the small fish go so that he 
ds> might again have the pleasure of catching them once they've grown 
ds> a bit more.  

You're equivocating.

-- 
Russell Lawrence, WP Group, New Orleans (504) 443-5000
russ@wpg.com   uunet!wpg!russ
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
From: viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson)
Subject: Re: Game Management Policies
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 04:05:52 GMT

In <BtxLFv.998@wpg.com> russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) writes:

>From article <viking.715389449@vincent1.iastate.edu>, by viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson):
>ds> I don't see anything hypocritical about it, providing the hunter 
>ds> is up-front in stating his desire to hunt. 

>We're talking about a man who justifies his hunting on the basis
>of the alleged threat of deer starvation.

	No, *you're* talking about a man who justifies it that way.  I don't
justify my hunting on ethical grounds at all -- I enjoy it, and it's legal,
and that's all I need.  That it has side benefits that may be ethical in
some curcumstances is fortunate, but I wouldn't base an argument on it.
Self-serving isn't hypocritical.  Hunters merely seek a balance of a healthy
and large herd given limited resources.  This strikes me as being rather
self-serving, but there's no deceit involved.

<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. >
From: tsr00@duts.ccc.amdahl.com (Ted Robinson)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
Subject: Re: My dog
Date: 1 Sep 92 01:04:34 GMT
Reply-To: tsr00@duts.ccc.amdahl.com (Ted Robinson)
Organization: Amdahl Corp, Sunnyvale, CA

In article <1992Aug31.050518.17493@informix.com>, proberts@informix.com (Paul 
Roberts) writes:
> Just to point out that you are quoting someone else, not me. I think it
> might have been John. In which case it's him you don't respect, not me.
 
Whoops, sorry about that Paul. I knew I was quoting someone else (actually, 
it was Dan), but I extracted the quote from an article you posted, since it 
had a more complete version. My newsreader, of course, automatically added 
your name. My apologies.

Ted Robinson
tsr00@duts.ccc.amdahl.com
These views are mine and not Amdahl's, etc.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals