HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: les@ulysses.att.com (Leslie Johnson)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Waiting periods for guns and domestic violence
Date: 29 Jul 92 20:09:09 GMT
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Murray Hill, NJ, USA

In article <1992Jul28.131809.11056@brtph560.bnr.ca> mpetro@brtph126.bnr.ca (Myron Petro P030) writes:
>
> Jonathon king wrote:	
>>I mentioned shotguns precisely because they have never been proposed	
>>for gun registration 
> WRONG!! check California 								
>  1. all firearms require a 15 day waiting period and backround
>     check. (including single shot shotguns)	 
>  2. the original assult rifle ban in PRofCa covered all semi-auto 	
>     and pump shotguns which had "could have" a capacity over 5 shells 
>     (I'm not sure what ended up on the final bill could someone in
>      Ca. and NJ give us the list)

Here's the list of shotguns that are banned under the New Jersey
definition of "assault firearm":
  - Any shotgun with a revolving cylinder such as the "Street Sweeper"
  or "Striker 12"
  - Franchi SPAS 12 and LAW 12 shotguns
  - USAS 12 semi-automatic type shotgun
  - A semi-automatic shotgun with either a magazine capacity exceeding
  six rounds, a pistol grip, or a folding stock.

Purchase of any shotgun in New Jersey requires a Firearms ID card,
which is issued by the local police chief after a background check
that typically takes from five to eleven months.

--
  - Leslie Johnson  (les@ulysses.att.com) 1+908-582-5493
       "One Bell System - It Works"
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: lambert@spectrum.cs.unsw.oz.au (Tim Lambert)
Subject: Re: KLECK: ANTI->PRO
Organization: CS&E, Uni of NSW, Australia
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 17:01:21 GMT

>>>>> On Sat, 25 Jul 1992 18:44:05 GMT, sybok@athena.mit.edu (The Rifleman) said:

> Remember a few months ago when Lambert ridiculed me for being unable
> to prove that Kleck was anti-gun before performing his study, but
> then abandoned the anti-gun position?  Well, I've found the support I need.

Your memory seems to be playing tricks on you.  This is the claim you
made that I described as a fantasy:

]>>>> On 8 Jun 92 21:49:37 GMT, sybok@athena.mit.edu (The Terminator) said:
] Gary Kleck.  He was hired by Sarah Brady and the gun controllers to
] research how guns were used in self-defense.  When he finished his
] research, he changed his mind to become in favor of handgun ownership and
] Brady attempt to hush hush the report.


> .. from a (relatively) recent speech by Prof. Gary
> Kleck ...  It helps us understand how many
> have arrived at mistaken views regarding gun control.

Including beliefs that HCI hired Kleck and tried to suppress his results?

> Summary: In 1976 Dr Kleck believed that "gun availability increases
> the frequency and/or seriousness of violent acts".  Now he believes
> that "general gun availability does not measurably increase rates of
> homicide, suicide, robbery, assault, rape, or burglary in the U.S".

Interesting. In the study referred to above, (published in 1988) he
states "the use of guns in assaults instead of likely substitutes such
as knives or fists probably increases the fraction of assaults which
result in death".

Tim
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: archer@utkux1.utk.edu (T. Archer)
Subject: Firearm availablity and the canadian crime rate
Organization: University of Tennessee Division of Continuing Education
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 19:17:14 GMT

In article <1992Jul24.044351.6180@adobe.com> pngai@adobe.com (Phil Ngai) writes:

>In article <1992Jul24.024121.23964@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> mzabel@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mark A Zabel) writes:
>>Possible Partial Explanations:
>>
>>1. Canada is not as impoverished as Mexico.  There is
>...
>>
>>2. Canada has less people per square kilometer than
>...
>>
>>3. Various cultural reasons exist.  For one, Canada did
>...

>Are you saying that in the case of Canada, gun restrictions are not
>primarily responsible for their low crime rate?

>-- 
>My opinions are my own.

That is correct.  Canada also has a lower auto theft rate, a lower assult 
rate, and a lower rape rate.  She is blessed with a more law-abiding, less 
violent people.
-=-=-
T. Archer  PA142548@utkvm1.utk.edu
University of Tennessee
"Vote Dempublican, it's easier than thinking." -- Unknown
-=-=-
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: lvc@cbnews.cb.att.com (Larry Cipriani)
Subject: Re: Washington State gun buy-back
Organization: Ideology Busters, Inc.
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 20:36:59 GMT

In article <1992Jul29.123340.26573@brtph560.bnr.ca> mpetro@brtph126.bnr.ca (Myron Petro P030) writes:
>
> Steve Deemer wrote:	
>>Never heard of people -stealing- guns for buyback programs,
> When NY city traced some of the guns from their buy back they
> found they were stolen after the buy back was announced. 
>
> If the buy back is done by a private group there is a law
> that states the BATF must be notified if a non FFL purchases
> more than 2 handguns

from a dealer.

>What does the BATF do with this case?

In this case, nothing.
-- 
Larry Cipriani, att!cbvox1!lvc or lvc@cbvox1.att.com
"I just love the smell of gunpowder." -- Bugs Bunny
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: uk09365@nx02.mik.uky.edu (robert i kesten)
Subject: Re: Compromise?
Organization: University Of Kentucky, Dept. of Math Sciences
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 21:40:42 GMT
Distribution: usa

In article <1992Jul28.142227.4507@cbnewsc.cb.att.com>  
rats@cbnewsc.cb.att.com (Morris the Cat) writes:
> 
> I propose the following compromise with the gun controller community;
> they assert the "wrong people" are getting their hands on guns and
> too soon:

OK, here's a compromise position.

What the pro=gun/rkba side gives:

1. Instant background check OR mandatory indelible "NO GUNS"
endorsement on drivers licenses/IDs of felons and those
adjudged mentally incompetent.  (similar to "UNDER 21"
endorsement on licenses in some states).

2. 24-72 hour cooling-off period on ALL guns (it makes no
sense to have it on handguns only) at the discretion of the
state / local government and/or if there are problems with
confirming the records.

EXEMPTIONS:
a. Bring a witness and sign a sworn affadavit that your life
is in immediate danger.  Wait waived for immediate purchase
of 1 firearm.  Obtaining gun under false pretenses = mandatory
jail term.

b. Possess valid CCW permit, license to carry, etc. = wait
waived or at least reduced to 24 hours maximum.

c. Possess valid state hunting license, wait waived on shotguns
and rifles during hunting season.

d. Competition shooters needing replacement firearms:  
bring damaged gun, witness, letter from competition sponsor
and sign sworn affadavit. etc. = wait waived.

All sworn affadavits would be available for investigation
by the local law enforcement; but they would be banned
from keeping permanent lists.  Substantial fines would
be imposed on any department keeping such records.  The
originals would be destroyed after six months.

WHAT WE GET:

1. National, reciprocal CCW permit (with training, etc.)
2. End of ban/restriction on interstate sales (subject
to a longer wait - if necessary - on out-of-state sales...)
3. Congressional endoresement of individual RKBA
4. Preemption laws and RKBA provisions in all 50 states

I'm sure there's more I could add...

Robert K.

Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,alt.politics.clinton
From: hellmann@cs.scarolina.edu (Douglas R Hellmann)
Subject: Re: "Demo Gun Control" (Was: democratic platform)
Organization: USC  Department of Computer Science
Date: 27 Jul 92 13:15:12 GMT

pngai@adobe.com (Phil Ngai) writes:

>In article <1992Jul24.042911.18398@dscomsf.desy.de> hallam@zeus02.desy.de writes:
>>The Canadians have a competent and well resourced police force to
>>enforce their gun control laws which have the support of their
>>population.

>So you agree gun control isn't going to work any better in the
>US than it does in Mexico.

>>A Swiss serviceman is issued with a rifle which he has to keep in his
>>house. He is also issued with ammo. He is responsible for both. If he is

>I see. So if the US government gave every male a rifle and a box of
>ammo, that would solve our problems with violence.

>>Also an assault rifle is not exactly the ideal weapon for knocking off
>>grocery stores. They are big suckers, difficult to stick under your
>>jumper.

>Oh, so assault rifles are not a problem. You should tell the State
>of California that, they are so scared of them they banned them.
>They should have asked HALLAM first and he would have told them
>the true story.

>-- 
>My opinions are my own.

If I were going to go out and rob someone, or go to a school to shoot a
bunch of kids, I would use a shotgun.  You get more spread, so you can
hit more people.  At close range in a robbery it would do more damage
too.  I don't know what the big fuss over assault rifles is.  Do we have
a bunch of snipers running around?

Doug Hellmann

Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,alt.politics.clinton
From: sybok@athena.mit.edu (The Rifleman)
Subject: Re: "Demo Gun Control" (Was: democratic platform)
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 21:33:04 GMT

>Assault rifles are the weapon of the heavy duty psycho or major league
>crook or some jerk playing at being one. There is no practical
>difference between an assault rifle and a handgun when it comes to
>knocking off 9-11 stores except that the assault rifle is going to be
>much harder to hide.

9-11 stores?  Looks like you don't know what you're talking about.


Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman)
Subject: Re: weapon identification
Organization: Computer Science Department,  Stanford University.
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 19:37:45 GMT

In article <1992Jul29.184444.16721@convex.com> tighe@convex.com writes:
>andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman) writes:
>>In article <1992Jul29.034735.11445@convex.com> tighe@convex.com writes:
>>>It is a 12 ga. shotgun manufactured by Cobray. It is based on a South
>>>African weapon. It has a 12 round drum magazine. Unless you are Arnold, it
>>>requires two hands to operate (like a 'tommy gun'). Semi-auto of course.
>>
>>Wrong, wrong, wrong.  It is a DOUBLE-ACTION revolving cylinder 12 shot
>>shotgun.  It doesn't have a drum and isn't a semi-auto.  It is just a
>>12 gauge revolver.  (The cylinder is turned with a spring; the gun has
>>to be wound up.  Said cylinder does not swing out; there's a loading
>>gate and ejection rod just like that found on most single-action
>>revolvers.)
>
>Overreacting a little don't you think?

Nope.  Feel free to spread misinformation, but don't expect anyone
to praise you for that.

>The original poster was most
>interested in make and caliber; what I posted was correct, correct,
>correct. Most of the other parts of what I said were correct also.

"Most" depends on whether or not Cobray was the manufacturer.  There
were at least TWO manufacturers, one used the name "street sweeper"
while the other(s) used some other name.  The guns were functionally
identical.

If it's worth the time to add details, it's worth the time to get them
right.

>I don't deny that it is a double-action revolver; but to someone who knows
>nothing about it, and thinks it is an automatic, it is much easier to tell
>them it is semi (one trigger pull, one shot).

You mean you intentionally misidentified the action type and think
this is a good thing?  Even your reason for doing so doesn't fly
because it is far easier to get someone to understand that revolvers
are not selective fire than it is to get them to understand that
semi-autos aren't.

>The solution of course, is next time you answer the question yourself,
>instead of sitting back and waiting to correct someone else.

I did, via e-mail.  Nevertheless, I don't see why my failure to answer
a question excuses your misinformation, even if I had an obligation to
answer every question posted.

If you want to call anti-gun folk on their lies, you have to be honest
yourself.

-andy
--
UUCP:    {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA:    andy@cs.stanford.edu
From: slzm9@cc.usu.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Call off the dogs. was Re:Waiting periods for guns and domestic violenc
Date: 28 Jul 92 17:17:13 MDT
Organization: Utah State University

   In an article earlier today I said that I do not agree with
the NRA's lobbying for maintaining the legality of automatic
weapons. I disagree with the NRA doing this. I didn't say they
did it this year I just said the NRA lobbied to maintain the
legality of these weapons.
   I suggested that the AK-47 was an automatic weapon. And 
since that article appeared I received five, count them five,
responses in two hours telling me I was wrong. I meant the AKS
assault "look-alike" rifle they said. Now I would like you to know that
there IS an automatic AK-47 and it is a perfectly good example
of an automatic weapon. So please stop telling me how I have been
manipulated by the popular media.
   And please don't assume someone doesn't know what they are
talking about until you do a little investigation. Thank You.
   Finally, to the one poster that wants to know why I have
the right to say that noone needs an automatic weapon:
   Because I have the right to an opinion and that's my opinion.

Peace, but not without justice,
Zip
From: sybok@athena.mit.edu (The Rifleman)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Rifleman needs enlightment (was Re: Enlightenment)
Date: 25 Jul 92 20:25:01 GMT
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology

In article <v2jmgd+.damiel@netcom.com> damiel@netcom.com (Paul Theodoropoulos) writes:
>
>this is all very entertaining, what with the ad hominem piled upon
>ad hominem, but really - wouldn't it be less embarrassing for the both
>of you if you took it to email?

Well, since archambeau claims he "kill filed" me, he'd probably get real upset
if I emailed him, and send all sorts of nasty letters to my postmaster,
no doubt urging him to have me be declared legally insane and incompetent.

I guess I thought someone might be interested in my response to him, but
doesn't look like it.  Ok, I'll shut up before the rest of you join
freeman and archambeau and add me to your kill file. . . .

No matter how much I'm run down, I'm going to KEEP posting, because I BELIEVE
IN THE CAUSE.  Some people don't realize that not everyone has the "street
smarts" to not ask "foolish" questions about using a badge to avoid
getting shot.  How the hell am I supposed to know how the police will
react to this or that situation without asking?  Isn't the only stupid
question "the one that was never asked"?  No doubt archambeau would have
prefered me to act on my own without seeking anyone's advice.  However,
although I may not have "street smarts" that need not imply I am careless
with firearms.  Well, enough of my whining.  Just remember.  No one likes
to be treated like a punching bag, no matter how "stupid" they may appear
to you.

I stood up for the Second Amendment in front of 40 students in a Courts &
Society class at MIT, when the professor was ready to dismiss it as
obsolete.  In fact, he couldn't readily counter my arguments off hand.
Where were you when I defended the RKBA?  No matter how many of you spit
on me, I am still more of an asset than you realize.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: lvc@cbnews.cb.att.com (Larry Cipriani)
Subject: Re: Washington State gun buy-back
Organization: Ideology Busters, Inc.
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 16:45:29 GMT

In article <1992Jul23.201637.19089@cbfsb.cb.att.com> osan@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (Mr. X) writes:
>
>	Where does this group, whoever they are, get the authority to
>	do this?  Again, I would like to know if this is indeed legal.

Why wouldn't it be legal ?  It would only be illegal if they were
going to resell the guns and didn't have the appropriate FFL.
There is no federal or Washington state law limiting the number of
guns you may own 

Actually, some good guns are turned in.  Andy Freeman mentioned in
tpg once that a mother turned in her sons $1000 trap gun.  Bitch.
During the St. Louis buy one guy brought in a nice shotgun and was
offered by a person waiting in line to sell his piece of junk much
more than the turn in price but refused to take the money.  I guess
he thought the gun had an evil karma or something like that ...

Also, some people just want to get rid of guns but don't know how
to do so [guess they never heard of gun dealers or flea markets].
My grandmother had my dad take to the police station my grandfathers
Beretta pistols after grand dad died.  What a fool.  I bet it was
worth some bucks.  Dad told me the policeman he gave it to asked
dad if he could keep it for himself for his night jobs as a guard ...

So, yes, basically fools turn in guns worth more than the turn in
price.  And only fools offer turn in money for junkers ...  ;-)
-- 
Larry Cipriani, att!cbvox1!lvc or lvc@cbvox1.att.com
-- 
Larry Cipriani, att!cbvox1!lvc or lvc@cbvox1.att.com
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: hays@ssd.intel.com (Kirk Hays)
Subject: Re: Re: Washington State gun buy-back
Organization: Intel Supercomputer Systems Division
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 17:15:38 GMT

In article <4400208@iftccu.boeing.com>, bressler@iftccu.boeing.com (Rick Bressler) writes:
|> > If the buy back is done by a private group there is a law
|> >  that states the BATF must be notified if a non FFL purchases
|> >  more than 2 handguns. What does the BATF do with this case?
|> 
|> Sounds like a good time to start using the 1-800 nubmers to BTAF.
|> 
|> There is a private group trying to illegally buy guns in Seattle.... 

Speaking of which, the below 800 numbers will no longer work from a phone booth
in a prefix where a protest call has been made - seems there was a *bit* too much
civil disobedience going on, to the point where, and I quote, "We couldn't put
the phones down without them ringing with a call from a phone booth, somebody
protesting..."

Some things to note here - BATF knew at least the prefix of the number calling,
more likely the entire number.

All these calls cost them money - big money.  It hurt.  They may have to
discontinue this program for lack of funds.

Phone booths have their own set of prefixes.  All phone booths in the same area
have the same prefixes.

Now, I wonder if we can get them to start disabling non-phone-booth prefixes?

I love the smell of civil disobedience in the morning - it smells like freedom...

-- 
Kirk Hays - NRA Life.
Start your day with a little civil disobedience.  Call BATF at 1-800-ATF-GUNS or
1-800-RUN-GUNS, tell them what you think of gun grabbers and government employees
that encourage people to narc on their neighbors.  Good for the soul.
From: osan@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (Mr. X)
Subject: Re: Cosmoline
Organization: Twilight Zone
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 20:07:53 GMT

In article <archer.188@utkux1.utk.edu> archer@utkux1.utk.edu (T. Archer) writes:
>In article <1992Jul26.152143.13906@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> dbetz@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Drew Betz) writes:
>
>>(preferably not 4473'ed at all) and an adequate supply of cosmoline
>                                                           ^^^^^^^^^
>
>Wazzat?

	Cosmoline is a compound used to protect steel surfaces from corrosion
	while they are in storage.  The bare steel and cast iron surfaces of
	machine tools are coated with cosmoline to keep them rust free.  The
	same is done with firearms.  Even though blued finishes resist rust,
	they are not immune, especially when the weapon sits for long periods
	in conditions that are not necessarily well controlled (humidity, salt 
	water etc.).

	When a gun is used and maintained properly and regularly, cosmoline
	is not needed and so is removed.  I'm not sure whether or not it is
	safe to keep it in an arm that is being used.  I have always removed
	it from mine.

	-Andy V.

Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: dbetz@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Drew Betz)
Subject: Re: Virginia Firearms Investigative Unit
Organization: SigSauer Fan Club 
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 23:12:10 GMT

In article <85fmw8k@dixie.com> jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond) writes:
>The root cause of the violence problem in DC could easily be eliminated.
>the first government-created mafia did in the 20s.  But there would
>be an overall massive reduction in violent crime - just as there was in
>the 20s.  After we cleared all the jails of the "drug offenders" and 
>got pending ones off the dockets, the system as it exists now could
>deal with the real criminals.

Yep.  And the prison spaced cleared could be used to house 3-time
losers.  We know that a small percentage of criminals commit a large
percentage of crimes, yet we're so preoccupied with wasting prison
space on somene busted the a baggie of cocaine that we let
multiple-offense violent felons out on parole.  What a joke.  Personally,
after letting out the druggies, I'd then begin sending 3-time
violent offenders away - Life without parole.

Drew 
--
drew betz : wj8k : dbetz@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu   
"Our campaign is the opposite of 'competence.'"
- Clinton aide Eli Segal, quoted in the 7/22/92 _Wall Street Journal_ 
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: shaffer@achilles.ctd.anl.gov (Michael A. Shaffer)
Subject: Re: UC Berkeley Police Rifles? (Was Re: Hate Speech Okay, says ...) 
Organization: Argonne National Laboratory
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 17:52:47 GMT

In article <1992Jul31.030143.8363@ncsu.edu>, hes@unity.ncsu.edu (Henry E. Schaffer) writes:
|> In article <1992Jul30.142947.23811@Princeton.EDU> egnilges@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Ed Nilges) writes:
|> > ...  if you go to Berkeley
|> >now, you will find that the campus policecars come equipped with high
|> >powered rifles.   ...
|> 
|>   I can imagine shotguns in police cars, but is this comment about
|> "high powered rifles" based in fact?
|> 
|> --henry schaffer

I've herd of them(cops) using little carbines in 9mm Para and an occasional
.223 rem for swat use but high powered rifles? This is interesting.
Tell me more.

				mike
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: uk09365@nx06.mik.uky.edu (robert i kesten)
Subject: Re: "Demo Gun Control" (Was: democratic platform)
Organization: University Of Kentucky, Dept. of Math Sciences
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 19:29:46 GMT

In article <1992Jul30.181100.3137@igor.tamri.com> donb@igor.tamri.com (Don  
Baldwin) writes:
> In article <1992Jul29.145354.18028@news.Hawaii.Edu>  
lee@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu
> (Greg Lee) writes:
> >I think the public arguments made against gun control in the U.S. may
> >be misleading.  Those arguments mostly concern whether proposed
> >restrictions will achieve their ends.  I would like to think that
> >a fair number of people oppose gun control
> 
> I would guess that the number of people who oppose gun control (i.e.,  
who
> oppose ALL gun control) is actually quite small.  The majority of people
> favor some kind of gun control.  Even the NRA (yes, I am a member) wants  
to
> keep guns out of the hands of violent felons and psychotics.  However,
> aside from those people, I believe that everyone should be able to own a
> gun.

	I would argue that only a small number are opposed to
	all controls and that only a small number favor exceedingly
	strict controls.  Unfortunately, IMO, pro-control forces
	often interpret high levels of support for basic concepts
	of "keeping guns out of the wrong hands" to be the same
	as high levels of support for any detailed control policy
	that is proposed.  The media often plays along with this,
	too.  The fact that very few (6-11% depending on the study)
	people even think to mention "gun control" (at least
	without prompting) when asked about measures needed to 
	control crime and violence is rarely given any coverage.

	I personally echo your beliefs as to who should or should
	not be permitted to own a firearm.  I still recall
	expressing these same sentiments several years ago on
	a networked "echo" on a private "BBS."

	  I said, "I think
	that any law abiding, mentally competent adult should be
	free to excercise their right to keep and bear arms." 
	The first response (from an anti-gun reader) was:

	"You're a fucking loony."

Robert K.
 
Xref: sparky talk.politics.guns:18176 alt.politics.clinton:976