HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kevin@clsi.COM (Kevin Cameron)
Subject: Re: ALERT! Anti-gun meeting in NoVA
Originator: kevin@dubhe
Reply-To: kevin@clsi.com
Organization: CAD Language Systems Inc.
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 92 15:22:42 GMT


In article <63011@mimsy.umd.edu>, purtilo@cs.umd.edu (Jim Purtilo) writes:
> In article <1992Dec22.144945.7622@clsi.COM> kevin@clsi.com writes:
> >In article <62995@mimsy.umd.edu>, purtilo@cs.umd.edu (Jim Purtilo) writes:
> >> In article <1992Dec21.200053.918@clsi.COM> kevin@clsi.com writes:
> >> 
> >> Its not clear how Fascism will help, Kev ......
> >
> >???? Who is a Fascist ?????
> 
> Sure looks like you are, Kev, from the position you have taken.  You have
> stated you want to ban firearms to "remove the means of the offence".  So,
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

You obviously didn't read what I wrote.

> at the same time you want to remove the means of self defense from millions
> of honest citizens, leave them open to prey by whatever criminals you prefer
> to protect, and remove the last "check" on a mammoth government in a system
> of checks and balances .... 
> 
>  ... all on the premise that this honest citizen *might* become a criminal?  
> That he or she may *may* someday be irresponsible?

Most criminals start out as 'honest' citizens.

> 
> >> system of justice? 
> >What ? - I was asking for prevention.
> 
> So am I!  Strong enforcement of existing laws would get offenders off the
> streets the first time you catch them, instead of allowing them out to commit
> hundreds, if not thousands, of crimes -- some of them heinous enough to report
> on the evening news. 

By definition that is not prevention.

> Face it. You're not going to stop all crime.

Don't expect to.

> >No matter how many times I read it, it still looks like bull****.
> 
> Ahh, ever articulate in debate.
> 

Maybe I should have said "unfounded drivel".

Kev.

-- 
Kevin Cameron          CLSI, Suite 100, 5457 Twin Knolls Rd., MD 21045, USA
kevin@clsi.com         Tel: (USA) (410) 992 5700 (- 5709) x224
uunet!clsi.com!kevin   Fax:       (410) 992 3536
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: stxtnt@rs733.GSFC.NASA.Gov (Nigel Tzeng)
Newsgroups: dc.general
Subject: Re: Street Hockey in DC/MD
Date: 31 Dec 92 16:56:38 GMT
Organization: Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md, USA

In article <1992Dec28.201718.8289@almserv.uucp> s5udjb@fnma.COM (David Boals) writes:

>   How about roller blade street hockey??  I would be interested in this
>   as well.  Any takers?

Caravan skate shop has both ice hockey and inline hockey teams...I
assume that you could find pick up games there too :).  The store is
in Beltsville MD.  If and when I learn to skate backwards I may decide
to join.

Nigel

>---
>   |	 David J. Boals          | 
--
Nigel Tzeng
.sig under construction
Newsgroups: dc.general
From: russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto)
Subject: Re: ALERT! Anti-gun meeting in NoVA
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 92 02:59:39 GMT
Organization: Project GLUE, University of Maryland, College Park

In article <5340@prcrs.prc.com> terry@prcrs.prc.com (Terry Cunningham) writes:
>
>Once again I will use my auto licensing analogy:  We don't let everyone have
>a car and let them loose on the roads, THEN figure out who is capable of
>driving responsibly and who isn't.

Yes, we do.  The driving test measures little more than whether you
can perform the physical and mental actions involved in driving.
Nothing to do with responsibility.  An equivalent test for guns would
involve being able to load the gun, pick it up, and fire it in
approximately the right direction.

When I took my driver's test, the test involved parallel parking, and
several right turns.  That's it.

On the other hand, if you would still like to make an analogy
between gun licenses and driver's licenses, there are quite a few
other consequences that I suspect you wouldn't like.
-- 
Matthew T. Russotto	russotto@eng.umd.edu	russotto@wam.umd.edu
Some news readers expect "Disclaimer:" here.
Just say NO to police searches and seizures.  Make them use force.
(not responsible for bodily harm resulting from following above advice)
From: Mike Pearl <mpearl@pes.com>
Newsgroups: dc.general
Subject: good mac bbs?            
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 92 21:05:49 EST
X-Maildoor: WaflineMail 1.00r

DW>Path: pes!uunet!paladin.american.edu!darwin.sura.net!cos!cos!doug
  >From: doug@cos.com (Doug Whitehead)
  >Newsgroups: dc.general
  >Subject: good mac bbs?
  >Keywords: bbs
  >Message-ID: <doug.725405416@cos>
  >Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1992 21:30:16 GMT
  >Organization: Corporation for Open Systems
  >Lines: 11

DW>Can someone please email me the number of a good
  >bbs that supports the mac?

DW>Thanks in advance
  >doug

Pick up a current copy of Mike FOCKE'S listing (DCBB1292.ZIP) from any
BBS in the area and search the file for "mac".

Michael
---
 * QMPro 1.01 90-0040 * /l{++h+$ C*hanks for hanging up, dear.
From: sgrant@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Sally Grant)
Newsgroups: dc.general
Subject: new year's eve
Date: 29 Dec 92 19:16:46 GMT
Reply-To: sgrant@oasys.dt.navy.mil (SGrant)
Distribution: dc
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

Help!
Any New Year's Eve suggestions that won't cost an arm and a leg; offers
a reasonably mature (no puking idiots) atmosphere; and is in the DC
area?
Please respond either direct mail (sgrant@oasys.dt.navy.mil) or to the
post

thanks,
Sally
From: dougnews@access.digex.com (Doug Humphrey)
Newsgroups: dc.general
Subject: loss of freedom
Date: 23 Dec 1992 16:05:53 GMT
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: access.digex.com

>Believe it or not, the Second Amendment is in the Constitution for 
>a purpose.  Ignore that purpose, lose your freedom, and you only have 
>yourself to blame.

Yeah, but the trouble is, Kev can ignore it and lose HIS freedom,
but only if I lose MY freedom too.  Because we have one constitution
and law for all, we are all in this together.  

In fact, this is the best argument for freedom of choice; right now
Kev is free to either do something, or not do it.  As am I.  Once 
it is ruled against, in the law or throught the modification of
(or simply turning a blind eye to) the constitution, nobody can do it.
Apply this to abortion, guns, personal and information privacy, 
whatever, it is all the same.  Personal rights must be weighed 
against societal needs, but banning something has far reaching
effects which are often not considered.  Dynamic analysis, not 
static, needs to be applied.

Question:  What is the general effect on peoples perception of
law and order and their willingness to be guided by it, when 
you take an action (banning guns as one possible example) 
which makes millions of previously law-abiding citizens lawbreakers?
Someone who has been a good citizen all their life, who has
a gun for protection and would never consider using it for 
unlawful purposes (there are millions and millions of people
who fit this description) is suddenly told to turn it in.

If they do not, they are a criminal.  If they do, they feel 
they can not protect themselves and their house (term not used
in the material, rather to describe the family unit and its 
values).  In short, you force these people into a decision that
they do not want to make and many of them will activly chose to
be a criminal, to break the law, and keep their weapons.

That decision is an important thing.  A decision to break the law.
What effects can that have on respect for the law?


-- 
Doug Humphrey    Express Access Public Access Internet   Voice (301) 220-2020
doug@digex.com   Dialup: (301) 220-0462 Login as "new"   Email info@digex.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"I say it again, in the land of the free; use your freedom of choice." - DEVO
From: terry@prcrs.prc.com (Terry Cunningham)
Newsgroups: dc.general
Subject: Re: ALERT! Anti-gun meeting in NoVA
Date: 30 Dec 92 17:35:32 GMT
Organization: PRC Realty Systems, McLean, VA

In article <1992Dec29.025939.14797@eng.umd.edu>, russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) writes:
> On the other hand, if you would still like to make an analogy
> between gun licenses and driver's licenses, there are quite a few
> other consequences that I suspect you wouldn't like.

This is my last post on the subject - email me if you want to follow up.

I do not claim that my analogy was a great one, I merely wished to provide
a thoughtfull response to the original thread with a metaphor that
illustrated my position.  We can all obviously tear it to shreds upon
close examination, especially if we are not inclined to show some compromise
and concede a point.

A minority on each side of an issue will take the extreme position and
attempt to polarize the debate using absolutist arguments.  The majority
of people tend not to be drawn to either extreme but merely want compromise,
and responsible behaviour from the proponents of a 'right'.   It seems to
me that gun owners (I am one myself) should be leading the effort to
demonstrate that responsibility to the majority of americans that fear the
proliferation of handguns and their use in violent crime.

Terry

-- 
 | Terry Cunningham terry@rsi.prc.com | "I don't like the looks of that      |
 | DoD# 541   'Debunkers of Dogma'    |  teenager over there" Grampa Simpson |
 | Highly Individual Flaming Idiot    |                                      |
Newsgroups: dc.general
From: kevin@clsi.COM (Kevin Cameron)
Subject: Re: Goodbye dc.general
Originator: kevin@dubhe
Reply-To: kevin@clsi.com
Organization: CAD Language Systems Inc.
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 92 16:46:20 GMT


In article <725162424.AA00000@blkcat.UUCP>, Don.Noll@p3425.f70.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Don Noll) writes:
> On 12/22/92, David Gursky said something very interesting to all on the subject
> of Goodbye dc.general. 
> 
>   DG> Personally, I'm tired of all this crap on dc.general about Gun Control
>   DG> and I'm unsubscribing to this group.  There are a number of
>   DG> appropriate newsgroups for this stuff and I'm chagrined I have to wade
>   DG> through crap about rulings by the Connecticut courts because of the
>   DG> poor manners of other people on this group.
>   DG> --- MacWoof 1.5.3
>  
> I have to agree Dave.  Most of the last few hundred messages have
> little to do with DC.  I just have not read most of them.
> I am sure there are a hundred or two people who read this group that feel
> the same way.
> 

As long as DC is the "murder capital" of the USA it is a relevent topic for
dc.general - it seems more relevent to me than the endless postings we had on
how many people turned up for the anti-abortion march.

I read soc.culture.europe - it is > 90% political dogma about Serbia,Macedonia
and Turks and has been for some time now, they won't go away either, but maybe
some of them have something to say that more people should hear.

Kev.
----
Feel free to put me in you kill file - I won't put you in mine.
--
From: williams@nssdcs.gsfc.nasa.gov (Jim Williams)
Newsgroups: dc.general
Subject: Re: Goodbye dc.general
Date: 23 Dec 92 15:07:16 GMT
Organization: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland

In article <725086927.AA00000@blkcat.UUCP> David.Gursky@p394.f70.n109.z1.fidonet.org (David Gursky) writes:
>Personally, I'm tired of all this crap on dc.general about Gun Control and I'm
>unsubscribing to this group.  There are a number of appropriate newsgroups for
>this stuff and I'm chagrined I have to wade through crap about rulings by the
>Connecticut courts because of the poor manners of other people on this group.

Amen and halleluia!  I've occasionally been tempted to bring up
political topics on dc.general and I've not done it for fear of
causing just the sort of explosion that this gun crap has.  

PLEASE!!!

Take it to talk.politics.gun, found a new group, dc.politics, or whatever,
but CUT IT OUT on dc.general.  Not appropriate, not wanted.

Testily,
Jim

-- 
Spoken: James W. Williams			Company: Hughes STX
Internet: williams@nssdcs.gsfc.nasa.gov		Phone: +1 301 286-1131
USPS: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center; Code 633; Greenbelt, MD 20771
Maryland Car Tags: DEV CAR
Newsgroups: dc.general
From: norton@cmf.nrl.navy.mil (David Norton)
Subject: Wanted: North Carolina vacation suggestions
Reply-To: norton@cmf.nrl.navy.mil
Organization: Naval Research Lab, Washington, DC
Distribution: w
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 20:22:07 GMT

I'm thinking about a family get together on the North Carolina shore  
around Memorial day.  Since I have never been to any N.C. shore points,  
I'm not sure what is available.  The family likes biking, running,  
golfing, fishing, and sailing.  A lively nightlife is not really important  
(too many kids), but some good restaurants in the area would be a plus.

I'm mostly interested in renting a nice four bedroom house for a week.  If  
you have any suggestions on great areas to stay or who to contact for  
information on rentals, please drop a note.  

Many thanks
-dave
Newsgroups: dc.general
From: drury@helix.nih.gov (Richard Drury)
Subject: Re: ALERT! Anti-gun meeting in NoVA
Organization: National Institutes of Health
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 08:31:26 GMT

terry@prcrs.prc.com (Terry Cunningham) writes:
>russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) writes:
>> On the other hand, if you would still like to make an analogy
>> between gun licenses and driver's licenses, there are quite a few
>> other consequences that I suspect you wouldn't like.
>
>This is my last post on the subject - email me if you want to follow up.

I can understand why you might want to move followups to email
at this point, but it's not that easy.  You expressed yourself
in a public forum.  People who have something to say about it
are going to do the same.  That's the tao of Usnet.

>I do not claim that my analogy was a great one, I merely wished to provide
>a thoughtfull response to the original thread with a metaphor that
>illustrated my position.  

But it *was* a great analogy.  It was probably a little
unsettling to discover how poorly it supported your position
that gun ownership is insufficiently controlled, but that
doesn't make it a poor analogy.  Just a reason to think a little
harder about that position of yours, maybe.

>A minority on each side of an issue will take the extreme position and
>attempt to polarize the debate using absolutist arguments.  The majority
>of people tend not to be drawn to either extreme but merely want compromise,
>and responsible behaviour from the proponents of a 'right'.   It seems to
>me that gun owners (I am one myself) should be leading the effort to
>demonstrate that responsibility to the majority of americans that fear the
>proliferation of handguns and their use in violent crime.

Well, I think you would be hard pressed to call me an extremist
on this issue.  I am *not* a gun owner myself.  But, I do
think that gun ownership is an issue with important social
implications, and have tried to learn a little about it.  What
I've learned (without any great effort on my part) is that in
most jurisdictions, gun ownership is actually more thoroughly
controled than automobile ownership.  Yes, gun owners should be
working hard to demonstrate their responsibility to the larger
community.  But conveying disinformation about gun ownership to
a public already scared silly by the rising tide of violent
crime doesn't qualify as "responsible behavior" in my book.

But it *was* a nice analogy ;-)
--
Richard A. Drury
drury@helix.nih.gov
From: Brian.Sorensen@f177.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Brian Sorensen)
Sender: Uucp@blkcat.UUCP
Newsgroups: dc.general
Subject: Re: ALERT! Anti-gun meeting in NoVA
Date: Fri, 01 Jan 1993 12:15:00 -0500

 . . .
 
 > it on your own property, you *never* have to worry about
 > licensing, insurance, driving tests, etc.

 TC> Then a minor question - how did you get that car to your property from
 TC> the dealership?  

On a truck!

. . .

... Catch the Blue Wave!
From: dougnews@access.digex.com (Doug Humphrey)
Newsgroups: dc.general
Subject: Rave on, Norma Jean
Date: 24 Dec 1992 05:20:32 GMT
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: access.digex.com


Had to get a subject like that might dodge the kill files!

I volunteer to support the mailing list for dc-guns.  Send 
mail to dc-guns-request@access.digex.com asking to be put 
onto the list (or taken off) and I will deal with it.

To submit mail to the list, just send to dc-guns@access.digex.com
and it will be mailed to all involved automagically.

Doug



-- 
Doug Humphrey    Express Access Public Access Internet   Voice (301) 220-2020
doug@digex.com   Dialup: (301) 220-0462 Login as "new"   Email info@digex.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"I say it again, in the land of the free; use your freedom of choice." - DEVO
From: purtilo@cs.umd.edu (Jim Purtilo)
Newsgroups: dc.general
Subject: Re: ALERT! Anti-gun meeting in NoVA
Date: 24 Dec 92 19:42:46 GMT
Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, Coll. Pk., MD 20742

In article <1992Dec24.164944.26190@clsi.COM> kevin@clsi.com writes:
>> 
>> Stopping the crimes by people who demonstrate a willingness 
>> to do violence, instead of releasing them to Kev so they are free to commit
>> all the crimes they can get away with, is "not prevention"???
>
>Want to define "demonstrate a willingness to do violence" for us ?

Let's try to illustrate what Kev does not see.  Someone "Joe" does a crime and
gets caught.  Tragic, but crime simply cannot be eradicated.  At issue is
how we respond to this as a society.  I would like to beef up law enforcement
to help catch Joe; straighten out and support the judicial system so Joe can
get a rapid trial; and, should Joe be found guilty of the crime, ensure that
Joe is rapidly sentenced and pays a substantial penalty.  If the crime was one
of violence, then I believe "substantial" means really doing time, not walking
away with probation and an admonition that Joe not do this again.  A swift and
certain jail sentence precludes --- prevents --- Joe from making a living from
crime even after having been caught.

Kev, on the other hand, wants to use the fact that this crime was committed
as further evidence supporting a crackdown on all of us, least we might also
do what our hypothetical bad guy "Joe" did.  Joe is likely free to continue
doing crime, since, in this scenario, the focus is on all citizens, not the
one who "demonstrated a willingness to do violence".  Sorry, Kev, but I will
continue to resist you when promote Draconian measures against honest citizens
without first trying to go after those who already show they are willing to
do crime.

Try going after the bad guys first, then let's see whether we need to further
restrict the rights of honest citizens.

Jim
From: purtilo@mimsy.umd.edu (Jim Purtilo)
Newsgroups: dc.general
Subject: Re:   ALERT! Anti-gun meeting in NoVA
Date: 29 Dec 92 02:41:30 GMT
Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, Coll. Pk., MD 20742


Barry, you ask some good questions, I hope this response helps ...

In article <mumble> warsaw@nlm.nih.gov (Barry A. Warsaw) writes:
>Are all guns stamped with a
>unique identification number similar to the VIN that all automobiles
>must carry?  

Yes.  All firearms now manufactured or imported absolutely must have an
indelible and unique serial number;  imported firearms are also required
to have the stamp of the importer.  This has been true for decades, and
was the convention for many years prior to the law requiring it too.  You
really won't find a firearm manufactured in this century without a serial
number.

>Also, a driver's license isn't the only thing you need to
>operate a car -- that car must also be registered with the state its
>owner is resident in.  

That is incorrect, at least in general.  You must have a valid registration
in order to operate the vehicle on public roads, but should be free to own
and operate a vehicle on your own property.  More recently, some states now
require a personal property tax of some kind on vehicles, and "registration"
is the ... err ... vehicle chosen for tracking that tax; and most recently
registration is used to track new laws concerning environmental impact, which
*may* be written so as to apply independent of whether you are using your
vehicle in public.  In theory, here in MD you should be able to certify that
your auto meets emission standards without having to register it for use on
public roads (I suppose that means you would have to cart it to the testing
stations for the check, then cart it home afterwards); however, in practice
you'd run into (at best) a lot of head scratching since the registration is
used to track the emission tests.

>Furthermore, the federal gov't and some (most?
>all?) states mandate a certain minimum compliance for autos re:
>seat-belts and other saftey devices, emission controls, etc. Some
>states require cars to be periodically inspected, etc.

That is correct.  But, again, for use on public hiways.  

As I've posted before, I am greatly in favor of instituting the auto-scenario
but for firearms.  Let me demonstrate that I am a competent operator, that I
understand appropriate laws governing its use, then let me drive my auto (or
carry my sidearm) any place in the US without subsequent restriction.  Please
feel free to regularly retest and recertify that I am safe with my firearm; 
make me keep it at home if I don't pass.  But also be sure to regularly make
everyone who drives an auto recertify that they are safe operators.  Please
apply the analogy exactly ... if someone (say, an elderly person) fails to 
pass a regularly administered driving test, then we do not have the state 
confiscate their vehicle; we make them leave it in their garage.  Treatment 
of firearms should be no different.    Yes, I like the analogy a lot.

Jim
From: m0102@tnc.UUCP (FRANK NEY)
Newsgroups: dc.general
Subject: Re: ALERT! Anti-gun meeting in NoVA
Date: 4 Jan 93 01:54:26 GMT
Reply-To: m0102@tnc.UUCP (FRANK NEY)
Organization: The Next Challenge, Fairfax, Va.


Exception: despite overriding VA state law to the contrary, the City
of Falls Church still has and enforces an ordinance that forbids the
transportation of weapons within the city.
 
You can buy a weapon, you can have one at home, but getting it from
shop or gunsmith to home or vice versa is illegal.

Frank Ney N4ZHG EMT-A  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: dc.general
From: kevin@clsi.COM (Kevin Cameron)
Subject: Re: ALERT! Anti-gun meeting in NoVA
Originator: kevin@dubhe
Reply-To: kevin@clsi.com
Organization: CAD Language Systems Inc.
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 92 20:00:53 GMT


In article <62934@mimsy.umd.edu>, purtilo@cs.umd.edu (Jim Purtilo) writes:
> 
> {guns & cars discussion deleted}
> 
> ...  But in both of these areas, firearms and unsafe drivers, I would
> hope we could reform the judicial system and elect judges that will really
> enforce the law....]
> 

You really mean enforce punishment (in the hope that adequate punishment will
deter the offenders).

This approach will generally mean 1 (or more) innocent person(s) dead or injured
for each offender punished. Better to remove the means of offence IMHO.

Excessive paranoia on the part of the gun owners will not help.

Kev.
-- 
Newsgroups: dc.general