From: jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala)
Subject: [alt.activism et al] Feedback to the Bill of Rights status report
Reply-To: jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala)
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 22:13:45 GMT

A repost from alt.activism,alt.individualism,alt.pagan:

From: adamsr@netcom.com (Rick Adams)
Subject: Re: Who's "free-er"? Intrnat'l response wanted!
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 92 18:20:09 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

	I've received a number of email responses to my post, all of which
point out that a great many restrictions exist on guns and that my statement
concerning the 2nd Amendment was in error. 

	While some of those posts argued that the right didn't exist based
on what I would consider rather "weak" grounds (i.e., minors cannot purchase
handguns across the counter, a three day waiting period for a first
purchase, a requirement that the purchaser not be a convicted felon,
limitations on fully automatic weapons, etc.), others were based on very
sound arguments which I am forced to agree with.

	My personal feelings on guns are not important. Despite reservations
with respect to a NEED for individuals to possess them, I have NO
reservations concerning their RIGHT to do so.

	One problem which had been an obstacle for both the anti WoD and the
anti WoG groups has been the adament position taken by the majority of the
pro-gun groups that the WoD is fair, that those who have nothing to hide
should not care about being searched, etc. This was typical of the messages
I received, many of which argued that it was "disgusting the way left-wingers
stood up for they drug-dealers and other scum while opposing decent
Americans." Others simply took the position that people who oppose the WoD
HAVE no rights. Only ONE person who responded (out of more than 12) felt
that any right other than the right to bear arms was under attack!

	Clearly this is a problem. The pro-gun advocates feel they are
fighting a losing battle to protect their rights against government
encrochment, while simultaneously alienating those who feel that other
rights are being lost through their support for the very laws which remove
those rights. Why should _anyone_ support the goals of people who oppose
their own  (and, yes, I know that it works both ways - many of us who are to
the left of center DO favor gun control - although few do so to the extent
that most pro-gun advocates favor limitations on other rights such as
abortion or free speech).

	What is needed is a coalition position which supports the
restoration of ALL rights. A united front by the right wing gun advocates
and the left wing (and right, since many are there as well) anti WoD
advocates might actually do SOMETHING to restore a bit of personal freedom
in this country. 

	So long as each of us supports a "single-issue advocacy" we will
never have the numbers to force ANY change, and the government will simply
go along taking rights from everyone until those of us who cannot live under
fascism are forced to leave this country (something many of us are very
close to doing) to seek freedom elsewhere - the opposite of the original
migratory path that formed this nation.

-- 
    rick.adams on GEnie   /|\  Reliable and affordable public access to 
     adamsr@netcom.com  /  |  \  telecommunications services is the 
    adamsr@irie.ais.org \ /|\ /  first step toward a global community.
   adamsr@norwich.bitnet  \|/  Send Email for files on GEnie and Netcom.