HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: J056600@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM
Subject: Re: My Purpose In Getting NAMBLA Shunned
Organization: Lockheed Missiles & Space Company, Inc.
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 20:24:18 GMT

In <p15onh0@fido.asd.sgi.com>, Jeff Dauber writes:

>In article <11846@optilink.UUCP> manley@optilink.UUCP (Dave Manley) writes:

>>Question: If these statements do in fact represent the beliefs of the
>>people, both hetero- and homosexual alike, how can anyone who opposes
>>child molestation find a way to support NAMBLA - when they refuse to
>>moderate their position to at least exclude prepubescent children?


>Answer:  I can support someone's right to exist without supporting their
>goals.  I think that the OCA has every right to exist.  I think that the
>KKK has every right to exist.  I think that if any member of any of the
>above organizations breaks the law they should be prosecuted.  However,
>until they break the law, they can take part in any group advocating anything
>that they would like.

Bingo.  I think someone *finally* has successfully distinguished between
approving of a group and acknowledging their right to exist.  NAMBLA makes me
sick, but unless they are actually *caught* molesting a young boy, then there
is no punishable crime and there is no right to deny NAMBLA's First Amendment
rights.  Now, if NAMBLA leaders were caught in a group meeting with a little
boy, then we have a different story.  That's the only way I can see any way we
should deny NAMBLA's right to exist as a legitimate group.


Tim Irvin   j056600@lmsc5.is.lmsc.lockheed.com
***************************************************************************
"In a free government the security for civil rights must be the same as that
 for religious rights." -- James Madison, Federalist Paper #51
Newsgroups: ba.politics
From: dauber@sgi.com (Jeff Dauber)
Newsgroups: ba.politics
Subject: Re: Activist shot at Berkeley Chancellor's home
Date: 31 Aug 92 18:05:25 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.

In article <zvhn99f.phil@netcom.com> phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone) writes:

>There is no such thing as a humane way to shoot somebody. If you shoot, shoot
>to STOP. Period. There is no other way possible.

Then don't shoot.


Despite all the gun statistics, no one has explained to me why this woman
had to be killed.


FWA
Newsgroups: ba.politics,alt.activism,ca.politics,talk.politics.misc,rec.martial-arts
From: tcox@netcom.com (Thomas Cox)
Subject: Re: Activist shot at Berkeley Chancellor's home
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 06:20:58 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Followup-To: rec.martial-arts

	Why did they have to kill her?  [Followups to rec.martial-arts.] 

rpwhite@cs.nps.navy.mil (rpwhite) writes:
>Arthur_T_Hu@cup.portal.com writes:

>>A 19 year old nutcase was shot after she attacked a cop with a machete
>>after breaking into the Chancellor's home in Berkeley.

>I am bothered by the question: "Why did they have to shot her?"

> [...] As the
>papers reported she was under five and half feet and weighed about 100
>pounds. She was by all accounts armed with a machete.
  [...]
>She wasn't a threat to anyone's life in that situation.

	Good point.  Plenty of opportunity to wait, talk, and let
	things calm down.  Maybe go get some tear gas on the side. 

>So let's check out the cop. According to accounts he was an Oakland P.D.
>K-9 officer. He most likely had a his disposal a trained attack dog, a
>baton, a sidearm, and mace. With all that at his disposal, facing a 100
>pound girl armed with a machete, he had to shoot and kill her?

	Slow down.  I've trained a bit in a machete fighting style. 
	No way for the cop to know her skill level.  I'll take the 
	machete over the gun when it comes to fast takedown.  (Sorry
	folks, but when Real People catch Real Bullets, they typically
	don't react _at all_ for upwards of five seconds.  This is not
	Hollywood.)

	If I have my dog there, and I like the dog, I'll kill the perp
	before I'll put the dog out there to get its paw chopped off
	and need to be put down.  The dog is the only assuredly
	innocent party in this scene.  (Are you familiar with the
	_real_ training given to police dogs?  They are NOT war dogs.) 

>Now they can trot out all the catchphrases that they do when they shoot
>someone, but I say "GIVE ME A FUCKING BREAK." 

	Since I've got the training, I'd set the dog down ("Stay,
	boy"), pull the nightstick and the mace, and take her two
	handed.  Mace is a nice fast takedown in most cases, and it
	screws their vision up in all cases.  Once her eyes stop
	working, I can take my time and use the minimum force
	required. 

> [...] I think that this was just another case of an
>incompetent asshole with a badge and a gun. 

	How much training does the typical cop get with a gun?  Many
	hours a year, plus regular re-qualifying.

	How much training does the typical cop get with any of the
	other equipment (nightstick, mace, NOT the dog)?  In most
	departments, *none*.

  [assorted vengeful stuff deleted]

>rp -- told you I have nothing against violence.

	The guy used the tool he was trained to use.

	Remember this when the local police complain that they don't
	want to be under citizen oversight boards.

	Followups to rec.martial-arts.

	Cheers.
	-- Tom
-- 
Tom Cox      DoD #1776   '91 CB 750 Nighthawk   tcox@netcom.netcom.com
Yeah, I have a day job.  They don't believe me any more than you do.
From: dauber@sgi.com (Jeff Dauber)
Newsgroups: ba.politics
Subject: Re: Activist shot at Berkeley Chancellor's home
Date: 31 Aug 92 20:44:21 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.

In article <390@vega.iii.com> rhockins@enrico.tmc.edu (Russell Hockins) writes:
>In article <p94l0k8@fido.asd.sgi.com> dauber@sgi.com (Jeff Dauber) writes:
>>In article <5vhnyzg.phil@netcom.com> phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone) writes:
>>Easy for you to say... My lover works at SF general in psychiatric
>>emergency (where they get their fair share of psychotic people).  They
>>have yet to have to kill someone to subdue them.
>>
>Yes, where tranqulizers and other chemicals to do their subduing. Or they
>have 5 to 6 people to subdue one person ( if neccessary ) 

Wrong.  The tranquilizers are used once the person is already down.  Not
before. Second, there are usually only two people involved in the take
downs.


>Not that I support deadly force, but *why* is everyone whineing about the
>police's use of deadly force and not about the deadly force that was being
>used against the officer?

Because one person is breaking the law, while the other is trying to uphold
it?

>Has no one heard of her previous arrest record?  

What did she do that warranted the death sentence?



FWA
From: gnn@wsl.dec.com (George Neville-Neil)
Newsgroups: ba.politics
Subject: Re: "Ecofascists" In Action
Date: 25 Aug 92 16:32:36 GMT
Reply-To: gnn@wsl.dec.com (George Neville-Neil)
Organization: DEC Western Software Lab

In article <92237.60260.J056600@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM>, J056600@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM writes:
|> Well, I think so.  How about companies which produce fish?  This may not be
|> feasible now, since good fish production out of the bay is not what it was 40
|> years ago (though better than 15 years ago :) !!).  Consider the timber
|> industry.  They hold much land, and if there are no trees, there is no timber
|> harvest.  It's in their own best interests to plant *two* trees for every one
|> they cut down in some places.
|> 

Yes, let's consider the timber industry.  Up until they were bought out by profit
greedy Wall Streeters in the 1980s looking for the quick buck, quite a few of
these companies did intelligent forest management.  Now that they are not longer
run locally they are clear cutting.  It is in their interest in the long run to
"plant *two* trees for every one they cut down" but without the long view in
management they are killing their children's future.  The profit motive
does not always work.

Later,
George


-- 
To fathom hell, or soar angelic, take a pinch of psychedelic.
				Dr. Osmond
From: kane@buast7.bu.edu (Hot Young Star)
Newsgroups: ba.politics
Subject: Re: Ask not what your country can do for you ...
Date: 4 Sep 92 16:03:45 GMT
Organization: Astronomy Department, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA

In article <18689tINNr38@agate.berkeley.edu>
martyg@ocf.berkeley.edu (Martin Guerrero) writes:

>Concerning "'Family Values' taking precedence over individuality.":

>  A persons individuality is best protected under the ancient institution
>  of the family.

How so?
Newsgroups: ba.politics
From: rchilder@us.oracle.com (Richard Childers)
Subject: Re: The real reason strayts reject gay men (was: Lesbian perspective)
Organization: Memes-R-Us
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 19:28:57 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:

>You don't have to do business with "homophobes."  Therefore, it's
>not a problem.  Stay away from us, we'll stay away from you.

Clayton, that's not a solution. You have to anticipate the times when
both parties are going to be proximate ... like, when living on the
same planet or coexistent in the same spacetime, y'know ?

-- richard

-- 
=====
-- richard childers		rchilder@us.oracle.com		1 415 506 2411
         oracle data center  --  unix systems & network administration

Newsgroups: ba.politics,alt.activism,ca.politics,talk.politics.misc
From: tcox@netcom.com (Thomas Cox)
Subject: Reginald Denny (was Re: Activist shot at Berkeley Chancellor's home)
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 01:51:06 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Followup-To: ca.politics

In article <p2ph968@fido.asd.sgi.com> dauber@sgi.com (Jeff Dauber) writes:
>In article <64717@cup.portal.com> Arthur_T_Hu@cup.portal.com writes:

[stuff about a Berkeley shooting deleted]

>>Related - other activists are calling for everyone to burn down LA
>>again if the attackers of Reginald Denny are convicted, calling Denny's
>>blood the justified reaction to oppression.

>>Anybody out there agree with these nutcases?

>I tend to think that this is a far more emotional issue than People's Park.
>This will not be activists rioting, it will be the disenfranchised rioting.
>I am not in a position to judge their rage.

Bullshit.  "Not in a position to judge their rage."  How cute.  Are
you in a position to judge illegal actions?  You have on other topics.
What makes this one sacrosanct?

>Jeff
>-FWA

Let me make a HUGE distinction between *moral* and *practical*
judgements.  I make two judgements about the Denny case:  I feel
*morally* that his attackers should be brought to justice.  I feel
*practically* that a "guilty" verdict against the accused will be
likely to spark violence.  

In a related vein, I *morally* condemn the conditions in south central
L.A. that made that area so ripe for rioting.  I also *morally*
condemn the rioting.  

Neither one surprised me.  I do NOT condemn those people who felt
rage.  I DO condemn those who inflict violence on the innocent, and
those who riot and burn and beat up people.

Cheers.
	--Tom
-- 
Tom Cox      DoD #1776   '91 CB 750 Nighthawk   tcox@netcom.netcom.com
"My opinions are just that:  mine, and opinions."
From: mikea@zorba.gvg.tek.com (Michael P. Anderson)
Newsgroups: ba.politics
Subject: Re: Run conservatives, run away! (Was: Re: Homophobics can't...)
Date: 27 Aug 92 19:37:42 GMT
Distribution: ba
Organization: Grass Valley Group, Grass Valley, CA

In article <athos-250892154800@athos.apple.com> athos@apple.com (Rick Eames) writes:

>Explain Carter.  Explain FDR.  Explain Clinton if he wins.  That's EXACTLY
>what you'll be getting.

Carter was a dictator?? I don't know Rick, I've been sitting here reading
your posts about blaming Wilson for the Ca. budget mess, blaming Congress
for the mess the U.S. presently finds itself in, blaming women when they
get pregnant, and I just can't figure out what makes you think the
way you do. In general I try not to blame, but in the above instances
I think there is plenty of responsibility to spread around. Where's the
common ground Rick?

Marked a liberal, the message I got from Houston was that if I don't conform
to their view of the world, there is no place for me in my own country. How
does that make me feel? Well, I'll tell you:

This is my country too. I'm not telling you how to behave or what to think.
Please don't tell me how to behave or what to think. If you continue I will
have to deprive you of your freedoms before you deprive me of mine. Is that
clear?
		
Are you people trying to start a civil war?

								MPA
From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: ba.politics
Subject: Re: The real reason strayts reject gay men (was: Lesbian perspective)
Date: 26 Aug 92 18:25:19 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <p15ucso@fido.asd.sgi.com>, dauber@sgi.com (Jeff Dauber) writes:
> In article <11843@optilink.UUCP> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
# #Only the "faggot" part matters to me.  And as long as you insist
# #on offending me and others like me with your parades, I will
# #insist on my right to not be around you.
# 
# Don't go to the parades and you will not be offended.
    
Don't go businesses that don't want to do business with you, and
you won't be discriminated against.

# First definitions (since I am making them up):
# 
# Active discrimination:  I do not like group X.  Therefore, I am going to
# try and keep group X out of my country clubs, schools, neighborhoods, etc.
# 
# Passive discrimination:  I do not like group X.  Therefore, I will not go
# to places where they are.
# 
# 
# I have no problem with passive discrimination.  You do not have to come
# to San Francisco.  You do not have to come to gay pride parades.  You do
# not have to watch gay pride parade coverage on TV.  Then, we are out of
# your life forever.

You don't have to do business with "homophobes."  Therefore, it's
not a problem.  Stay away from us, we'll stay away from you.

# FWA


-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
Alcohol prohibition didn't work; drug prohibition doesn't work; gun
prohibition won't work.
From: phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)
Newsgroups: ba.politics
Subject: Re: Activist shot at Berkeley Chancellor's home
Date: 31 Aug 92 20:34:14 GMT
Organization: Generally in favor of, but mostly random.

In article <p94pang@fido.asd.sgi.com> dauber@sgi.com (Jeff Dauber) writes:
    >I will ask you again... What would they have done with this
    >woman in England where they do not carry guns? They would
    >have disarmed her.
    >
    >I cannot figure out why you are so set on having the cops
    >kill someone when she could have been subdued? Do we train
    >cops to kill rather than subdue? If so, this needs to change.

Who knows what they would have done? What would your sexual
partners be like if you were straight? (i.e., you have asked
an unanswerable and meaningless question).

I know they killed the loony town walking around that town shooting and
killing people.

And your beloved peaceful English subdue-'em-gently law enforcement types
have set multiple shoot-first-and-ask-for-surrender second ambushes
aginst the IRA -- two of which went off on inocent people. And of
course, then there are the crossing into Ireland to "correct" matters.

So, I guess we should subdue the crazy and bloody well murder the
political opposition and other nasties eh?

Right-oh dear chap, carry on ...


But please, discuss what I say. I have indicated no such desire
for cops or anyone else to kill someone.

Your assumption that it was a choice has as little bearing to what
I KNOW about violent encounters as you feel you have in choice over
your sexual orientation. I.e., damn little choice in a do-or-die
encounter.



-- 
phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)

"I can't get no satisfaction ...", M. Jagger
"Yeah, right, tell me another one Mick.", P. Ronzone

These opinions are MINE, and you can't have 'em!  (But I'll rent 'em cheap ...)
From: rchilder@us.oracle.com (Richard Childers)
Newsgroups: ba.politics
Subject: Re: How to Profit from Death
Date: 27 Aug 92 19:21:53 GMT
Distribution: ba
Organization: Memes-R-Us
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:

>I completely agree with you about the importance of clean needle
>exchange.  (Hell, let's just make it laissez-faire -- no need for
>exchange).  But I think you are making a serious mistake when you
>assume that opposition to it is that "drug users deserve to die..."
>The problem is that there is a perception that allowing needle
>exchange will be seen as the government approving of drug use.

I know of people whom have been doing this privately since @ 1986 ...
as well as teaching how to use bleach to sanitize needles ...

Where do you think The Bleachman ( a common logo on bus stops a few
years ago here in San Francisco ) came from ?	(-:

I guess it must have been those Thousand Points Of Light, hard at work
while the Government diddles itself in Washingtoon ...

-- richard

-- 
-- richard childers		rchilder@us.oracle.com		1 415 506 2411
         oracle data center  --  unix systems & network administration

			Klein flask for rent. Inquire within.
Xref: sparky ba.politics:4830 alt.activism:15570 ca.politics:7130 talk.politics.misc:42435
From: Arthur_T_Hu@cup.portal.com
Newsgroups: ba.politics,alt.activism,ca.politics,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Activist shot at Berkeley Chancellor's home
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 17:13:18 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)

... the cop had used excessive force in the past ..

No sir, the article I saw in the Chronicle said that the oficer
(his name was Chew, so that makes him an Asian-American officer
defending an Asian-American family against a Caucasian goofball)
had been shot 3 times by a mugger the year before. If somebody
lunges at you with a machete, and you are armed with nothing
but a handgun, what do you do?

Like I said, if this girl is a total nutcase, and all the other
park activists are rallying to her case, aren't they nutcases too?
Aren't most 60's activists willing to blow stuff up kookoos?
From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: ba.politics
Subject: Re: Activist shot at Berkeley Chancellor's home
Date: 31 Aug 92 18:24:10 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <n0dntvq.phil@netcom.com>, phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone) writes:
> In article <p56ui54@fido.asd.sgi.com> dauber@sgi.com (Jeff Dauber) writes:
#     #However, the answer should not be "shoot to kill." Again,
#     #police should be trained to do otherwise. If they do not,
#     #they should be investigated and if found to have used
#     #unnecessary force leading to death, should be tried for
#     #murder.
# 
# Then, we might as well disarm the police. When it became known that any
# cop that shot someone would be tried for murder, it would kind of be an
# open day on police now, wouldn't it?
# 
# However, this paragrapgh appears (??) to be from a classic position of
# firearm ignorance -- the erroneous concept of shoot to wound.
# 
# A firearm is NOT a warning device, it is NOT a noisemaker, it is NOT for
# brandishment. In general, do not draw your firearm unless you are going to
# use it to STOP someobody.
# 
# phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)

Though to be fair, most of the time a firearm is used defensively,
it functions as one of those items.  The problem is that you must
be willing to use it as a deadly weapon as well, once you draw it.

Mr. Dauber has related a story to me of a friend of his who used a 
gun in precisely that mode to cause an attitude adjustment among a
bunch of gay-bashers.  Fortunately, as such events usually turn
out, the presence of the gun was enough to persuade the drunken
thugs to go away.
-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
Alcohol prohibition didn't work; drug prohibition doesn't work; gun
prohibition won't work.
Newsgroups: ba.politics
From: whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt)
Subject: Re: Activist shot at Berkeley Chancellor's home
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 18:22:16 GMT

In article <1992Sep1.150708.22648@queernet.org>, rogerk@queernet.org (Roger B.A. Klorese) writes:
> In article <1992Aug31.221606.20561@pbhya.PacBell.COM> whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt) writes:
> >Let me know when you figure out a way to get all the crazies and drug
> >dealers off the streets and keep 'em off--with or without weapons.
> 
> Why?  I feel far safer in my neighborhood when the "crazies and drug dealers"
> are on the streets than when the cops are...

You must live in a much wilder neighborhood than I do.

	--Hal
-- 
Hal Heydt                    |    "Boycott Time-Warner"
Analyst, Pacific*Bell        |         --J. Danforth Quayle
510-823-5447                 |    "... kill all the lawyers."
whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM    |         --William Shakespeare
Newsgroups: ba.politics
From: phz@cadence.com (Pete Zakel)
Subject: Re: "Ecofascists" In Action
Organization: Cadence Design Systems
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 20:25:22 GMT

In article <1992Aug25.155611@kuttner.sfc.sony.com> weaver@kuttner.sfc.sony.com (Eric Weaver) writes:
>
>I would be quite happy to sign a petition to recall Willie Brown, but
>I'm afraid I don't live in his district...

Actually, according to Pat Dillon, NOBODY lives in Willie Brown's district,
due to gerrymandering.  Basically, Willie can't be recalled until after the
next election.

-Pete Zakel
 (phz@cadence.com or ..!uunet!cadence!phz)

	"I don't know what you mean by `glory,'" Alice said
	Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously.  "Of course you don't--
till I tell you.  I meant `there's a nice knock-down argument for
you!'"
	"But glory doesn't mean `a nice knock-down argument,'" Alice
objected.
	"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful
tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor
less."
	"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean
so many different things."
	"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master--
that's all."
		-- Lewis Carrol, "Through the Looking Glass"
Newsgroups: ba.politics,alt.activism,ca.politics,talk.politics.misc,misc.test