waashk/20ng huggingface dataset:
Thomas Parsli <thomasp@ifi.uio.no> writes:    >I don't remember the figures EXACTLY, but there were about 3500 deaths in Texas >in 1991 that was caused by guns..... >This is more than those beeing killed in car-ACCIDENTS! >(Yes, there could be that low sentences or high poverty could influence the >figures but they're still *pretty* high right??) >I also believe Texas has some of the most liberal 'gun-laws' in USA......  In Texas, you cannot carry a handgun.  Period.  Either concealed or open. And your numbers are misleading; they include suicides and accidents.  The real number from the Department of Public Safety:                     Murders, Non-neg hom		Car fatalities 1991			2651			  3079 1992			2240			  3057  Texas only has "liberal" gun laws as far as purchasing a firearm; aside  from that, it's probably more restrictive than most states as far as carry goes.   >One state (don't remember which, Texas??) tried to impose a rule that you could >only buy ONE gun each MONTH. Think you all know what happened.....  The state was Virginia, and the law passed.  >I respect the right to defend yourself, but that right should not inflict on >other people.  That right only inflicts on those who threaten my rights to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, etc., in the first place.  I am not a criminal, and I don't indiscriminately fire my weapons at random.   So please explain how I am "inflicting" anything on other people.  >	This is not a .signature. >	It's merely a computergenerated text to waste bandwith >	and to bring down the evil Internet.   >                        Thomas Parsli >                        thomasp@ifi.uio.no
Bill Vojak:   BV>I read in the paper yestarday that Ted Turner wants to "trim" down  BV>his media holdings and is putting CNN up for sale.  The #1 potential  BV>bidder?  TIME/Warner of course.  Sigh . . . . . Just what we need. :-(   Maybe now's the time for us, the NRA, GOA, CCRTKBA, SAF, et al to band  together and buy CNN as *our* voice. Wouldn't that be sumpin....broadcast  the truth for a change and be able to air a favorable pro-gun item or two.... ---  . OLX 2.2 . There is no way they can get over here!        A. Maginot
In article <dusek.735489223@shale> dusek@rtsg.mot.com (James P. Dusek) writes: >ccdarg@dct.ac.uk (Alan Greig) writes: >>or the cultists...) I think I'll quote the BBC quoting (actually voice >>interview) one of the two British survivors. He claimed that the fire >>started when the tanks caused an internal wooden wall/roof to collapse >>knocking over kerosene lamps and that they had no suicide plan. > >	If the FBI started the fire, why didn`t people flee the >burning building?  In this case, it was unimportant as to who set the fire.  The Davidians would have burned no matter what, ESPECIALLY if the BATF/FBI set the fire as this would make the beseiged martyrs to Vernon Howell and therefore rocket to heaven.  A few comments from the remaining Davidians scattered throughout the country seemed to confirm this theory (One cult member said that she wished that she had been there, and that now she would have to wait for Vernon to Return for them.  She actually seemed upset that she did not burn with them).  While I think that Vernon started the fire (his followers anyway),  it is incidental to their reaction.
jrm@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu writes:  >	Firearms tend to fall into this low dollar/pound area. >	It would not be economic to smuggle them in. All production >	would have to be local. There are not all that many people >	who have both the skill AND motivation to assemble worthwhile >	firearms from scratch. High-ranking crime figures could >	obtain imported Uzis and such, but the average person, and >	average thug, would be lucky to get a zip-gun - and would >	pay through the nose for it.   So why did the Australian Customs Service make a public statement to a parliamentary committee last year that weapons smuggling was a problem which it was not able to control?  Possibly criminals don't have your  grasp of economics?
In article <1993Apr23.151855.7011@starbase.trincoll.edu>  () writes: > In article <1r6p8oINN8hi@clem.handheld.com>, jmd@cube.handheld.com (Jim De > Arras) wrote: > >   > > I have not made up my mind about Waco, but there sure seems to be a group   of   > > devoted government following fanatics willing to believe whatever that   > > government wants to tell them, without any shred of doubt, nor thought of   thier > > own.  They sure get shrill whenever their belief structure is being shaken. > >  > > Kinda reminds you of the BDs, doesn't it? > >  > > Jim >  > Go to hell. I'm no "government [-] following fanatic." Your sweeping > generalizations evince your own ignorance.   Eloquently, if somewhat shrilly, put.    > What were they supposed to do?  Just let him be?   Well, why not?  > Fuck him. Fuck the ATF, too. They should've done it right > the first time.  You have a way with words.  And you sure get shrill on cue. >  > joe.kusmierczak@mail.trincoll.edu  Jim -- jmd@handheld.com
In article <1r3j2k$da2@menudo.uh.edu> HADCRJAM@admin.uh.edu (MILLER, JIMMY A.) writes: >  Minor quibble:  The assualt (and it was one) began near dawn.  The fire did >not break out for several hours.   	Minor quibble back at you.  I am in the same general area as 	the Koresh compound and I can tell you that the air was quite 	chilly that morning, especially with the high winds that 	were blowing. (Of course the swiss cheese walls made it 	even worse. ;-)
In article <1993Apr22.173240.29129@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> scasburn@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Steven M Casburn) writes: >In article <C5vGME.GoA@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> wwarf@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Wa >yne J. Warf) writes: >>In article <C5v9Fv.Krt@news.cso.uiuc.edu> irvine@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (Brent Irvin >e) writes: >>> >>>If you won't believe anything the government says, and the press >>>is not reliable according to the same logic, then what do you base >>>your statements on?  Wild speculation laced with a healthy dose >>>of paranoia? >> >>Are you a moron or just illiterate? >> [...] >>Oh, I forgot, you're the guy that doesn't know microwave oven need >>electricity, never mind. > >     And you're the guy that doesn't know that illiterate people can't write  >coherent sentences. Does that make you superior somehow? >  Oh my god, I made a typo AND used the word "god". Come burn my house down, I must deserve it.  >    Steve Casburn (scasburn@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu) >    "Across the page / across the ages / the moving hand of history [pleads] >     For a kinder eye to see us / not as we are / but as we dream" >                                                  -- Mark King
OK... quick scenario... you're at home, not bothering anybody... next thing you know, somebody comes crashing in the upstairs window and you hear an explosion. You see that this individual has a submachinegun, and that more similarly armed individuals are rushing your front door.  Will you a) defend yourself and family against this attack b) realize "oh, only the BATF would enter like that, so I  better surrender" or c) roll over and let whoever is attacking your home do what they would like?  You have chosen a), and discover that the people you  defended yourself against are federal agents, who now are camped outside your door waiting for you to surrender.  You have learned that they intend to  charge you with murder, and are further defaming your name, while claiming that you can safely surrender at any time.  Then they start using psychological  warfare techniques against you, while still claiming that you can safely give up and will receive a fair trial.  Some weeks into this standoff, you are still holding out, when they begin a new ploy to induce your surrender, namely using tear gas to annoy you, and ramming your home with tanks.  Yet they claim that you can safely surrender at any time.  While you patiently wait out this latest round of attacks, your house catches fire and the bales of hay you were using as cover spread the fire rapidly through the house, and you try to escape through the fortifications you had raised for your own defense and the rubble created by the tanks.  Only 9 of your followers make it.  I am not claiming that the above scenario is accurate.  I am disagreeing with the notion that it is their own fault for dying because they refused to  surrender to agents of the Federal government after another federal agency committed an armed assault of their home on the basis of a flimsily concocted search warrant.    Look at how the Texas Rangers view the BATF.  Look at the FBI statements regarding the BATF actions.  From all apparent sources, the FBI blundered trying to clean up the mess made by the BATF, resulting in an accidental fire which killed most of the BD's who were still in the compound, and are now  playing CYA.  The BATF committed an illegal assault, obtained the use of  Texas NG resources with fabricated allegations, and compounded their abuses by accusing the BD's of crimes outside their jurisdiction once they had been held off in their assault.
The explanations of Federal law enforcement officials about what happened in Waco is just another example of the survivors writing the history books to put themselves in the best of a bad light. --  Dave Feustel N9MYI <feustel@netcom.com>
In article <1993Apr23.153005.8237@starbase.trincoll.edu>, () writes: > > Must be comforting to belong to a government approved religion.  > > Baptists are a cult, two, BTW, under most of the definitions in the dictionary   > > of "cult".  > I've yet to meet a group of Baptists who were stockpiling Cambell's soup > and M-16's/AR-15's  Know any Mormons?  > and banging/marrying thirteen yuear olds.  Know for a fact that this was happening?  State of Texas says it wasn't, and they held a trial to prove it.  > You're a sorry > son of a bitch if you can't draw a distinction between these two things.  Sure we can.  The top two things are perfectly legal.  The bottom one isn't.  The person here who can't distinguish seems to be you.  > People like you cheapen our constitution by using it to defend sociopaths > who aren't deserved of it.  So the constitution is only for people you approve of.  Fine, fine. I usually refer to that as "elitism," because "bigotry" is so negative.  > Get a life and chill on the paranoia.  Knowing that people like you are out there really gives me warm fuzzies.  > joe.kusmierczak@mail.trincoll.edu  --
In article <C5tBwr.5xI@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, tomgift@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Tom Gift) writes:  > No, they didn't have electrical power, but no, I don't find the idea of > Davidians calmly cooking lunch with gas masks on as the FBI knocks the > buildings down very credible,either.  I don't know how quickly YOU can get a woodstove to heat up from a cold start, but mine takes about three hours.  > It's not like this whole discussion is relevant.  It started when some- > one made the wholly unsubstantiated allegation that the wood stove ig- > nited NAPALM the FBI shot into the buildings.  Mox nix.  The BD's were prepared to provide their own heat and light, and were doing so for weeks while the power was out.  That means the compound contained containers of flammable liquids or gases (that could be busted by a tank intrusion), plus ignition sources, which no one can  tell for sure were all off at the time.  > I'm not a groveling apoligist for the feds, far from it.  But wild ac- > cusations like this are ridiculous and obfuscate legitimate criticism of > their conduct in this whole affair.  On the contrary.  We are proposing alternate scenarios.  The people who are coming to wild conclusions are the feds, who are absolutely positive how the fire started, even though none of them were in a position to  see it, either (and the stories they "hear" from their prisoners changes hourly). --
In article <1qkcok$s9i@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>, ci946@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (John K. Gever) writes: |>  |> Do you Rambos who worry so much about rape and murder in the |> wilderness also carry your guns all the time at home too?  You |> should, since you're in a hell of a lot more danger there than |> in the backcountry.  when does carrying a tool classify someone as a rambo.  so all the pioneers that came west were rambo's?  adrienne!!!  :-)  |>  |> Does anybody reading this group have an actual, honest-to-God |> experience with violent crime in the backcountry to tell about? |>  |> I can sort of understand the people who want to protect themselves |> from bears and such, although there are, what, maybe a dozen or |> two bear attacks on people in North America each year?  But to |> worry about being raped by some buck-toothed Bubba in overalls |> is just irrational.  I think we'd all be a lot safer if all the |> videocassettes of "Deliverance" were gathered up and burned.  would your tune change if you were one of the "dozen or two bear attacks"? believe me, when you need a firearm, you NEED a firearm.  |>  |> Public health experts will tell you that you are far more likely |> have your gun stolen, use it yourself on a family member or |> have it used on you than you are to use it on an actual criminal.  please cite your references.   i'll let others (please note followup) cite valid references to show you that this is an untruth.  |> The Rambo warriors we've heard from here undoubtedly consider |> themselves exempt from this statistical reality -- they're much |> too smart and responsible.  Living in a city where there's a |> drive-by shooting every couple of days, and working in a medical |> center where a day doesn't go by without a shooting victim coming |> into the ER, I'm just a bit skeptical about the value of gun |> ownership.  I go to the backcountry to get away from this  |> environment, and I don't want to find other people there who |> insist on bringing the urban environment along with them -- boom |> boxes, computers, or guns.  well, you might as well go naked.  forget the matches, backpack, sleeping bag and all the rest that's is a modern convenience.  a firearm is just a tool.  as some people won't carry gaiters, some people do.  firearms should be in the same category.  it should be a personal choice.  and your factoid about shooting victims in the ER.  count how many come in due to automobile accidents and automobile crimes.  maybe we should outlaw cars.  |>  |> Please post flaming responses to rec.guns.rabid  >:-( |> - J. Gever, B'ham, Ala.
In article <1993Apr23.152549.8169@starbase.trincoll.edu>, () writes: > In article <1r5rnn$rdt@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>, bu008@cleveland.Freenet.Edu  > > Perhaps you've been under a rock the last few days?  The BATF and the FBI > > are both federal agencies.  Clinton has admitted in front of news cameras > > that Janet Reno (the once and future Attorney General) gave him a full > > briefing of what was planned *before* they did it, and he gave her the > > go ahead.  > > Maybe, just possibly, that makes him a *teensy* bit responsible?  > Perhaps you've been under a rock since, say, the turn of the century. How > in the #$^& is one man supposed to review every single freaking > governmental action, every day? That's why we have an executive branch. HE > reviewed the plan and said "go," but he wasn't the architect and he wasn't > there, bullhorn in hand, implementing it. Yes, he was responsible in the > sense that he was briefed. So what! Shit happens.   Hey, joe -- assuming you're old enough to remember it -- how did you feel about presidential responsibility every time Reagan said "I don't recall"  about his arms-for-hostages meetings with the Ollie North gang?  How did you feel about it when Bush said he "was out of the loop on that decision" when he was right there in the thick of it?  Oh, right.  "He was responsible in the sense that he was briefed, but so what -- shit happens!"  Is that what you said?  > joe.kusmierczak@mail.trincoll.edu --
Fact:  Both Janet Reno and Bill Clinton have admitted responsibility,        even grief, over the deaths in Waco.  Fact:  Regardless of who started the fire, there are more than enough        things on tape to make a civil rights case against these two.        Cruel and unusual punishment (dying tortured rabbits on tape?)        come to mind.    Fact:  It is a federal felony to infringe civil rights under color of        law; where death is involved, this offense carries a penalty        of life in prison.  Fact:  Impeachment is allowable for "high crimes and misdemeanors."        Anything that's a federal felony should qualify.  Conclusion:  We have NO CHOICE, if we are an honest people, but to               impeach Mr. Clinton, and remove Reno from office.
In article <1993Apr21.151601.14962@gozer.mv.com>, klm@gozer.mv.com (Kevin L. McBride) writes: > The U.S. Government's campaign of persecution and genocide against the > Branch Davidians was a resounding success. >  > Heil Clinton!  Heil Reno!  The Gestapo is alive and well and living in > Washington, D.C.  Are you for real?  People dumb enough to give their money and possessions to a guy who says he's jesus deserve all they get  Anyway, he killed a few feds  He's not the goddam hero here  He's dead an' i'm happy!!!!!  >  > --  > Kevin, who agrees that David Koresh was probably a first-rate nutcase >        but who firmly believes that the Bill of Rights guaranteed his >        his right to be a religious fanatic and that the government is >        guilty of violating his civil rights and of 1st degree murder. >  >        OK, which small, under-represented-in-congress religious group >        are we going to persecute next and are we going to torch their >        church with a rolled up copy of the Constitution? >  >        I think I'm going to be sick now. . .
In article <1993Apr22.175410.23214@starbase.trincoll.edu>  () writes: > "Freed om of Religion" has absolutely nothing to do with building a small > arsenal and grooming 10-year old children to be your wife. "I'll come out > as soon as I finish my manuscript on the Seven Seals." Oh, OK, David. >  > I agree that Koresh was as much of a victim as a perpetrator; this because > he grew up inside the cult, and engaged in a power struggle where his > supporters helped inflate his ego. >  > That doesn't change the fact that he was a loose fucking cannon with a > shitload of serious weapons. Or that he was banging thirteen year olds and > twisting their impressionable little minds. >  > This was no MOVE fuck-up. A helicoptor was thermal-imaging the compound > that afternoon and detected three fires erupting almost simultaneously. > There were no CS CANISTERS... a specially modified Abrams was pupming the > stuff in. No chance of starting a fire there. Kerosene lamps? Maybe one, > but not three fires. No way. Koresh wasn't just talking out of his ass. I > expected this to happen. >  > Maybe they WANTED it to look like murder. He had 50+ days. I think this was > coming the whole time. He didn't even put the children in the buried bus or > the underground bunker during the CS seige. He put them up into the tower > to die. Fuck all of you "Big Brother" paranoid freaks. The only good thing > to come of any of this is that there will be one less group of crazoids to > attract some of the more rootless members of our society. >  > joe.kusmierczak@mail.trincoll.edu  I have not made up my mind about Waco, but there sure seems to be a group of   devoted government following fanatics willing to believe whatever that   government wants to tell them, without any shred of doubt, nor thought of thier   own.  They sure get shrill whenever their belief structure is being shaken.  Kinda reminds you of the BDs, doesn't it?  Jim -- jmd@handheld.com
In article <1r4ef7$408@transfer.stratus.com> cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares) writes:  >Do you think a $200 tax evasion justifies an armed assault by the government >with 100 armed men in trailers, orchestrated character assassination, noise >torture, and a holocaust?  I doubt if Koresh had let the BATF have a look inside his place as they  intended to do, "orchestrated character assassination, noise torture, and a holocaust" would never have come to pass.  The BD's killed members of the BATF on the first day. "Orchestrated character assassination and noise torture" seem like a small retribution.  The use of tanks is quesionable however.    --Abhijit
In article <C5JAtz.5G4@cbnewsc.cb.att.com> rats@cbnewsc.cb.att.com (Morris the Cat) writes: >... >Let's prohibit arms carrying by police when off-duty. Or, if they make >the assertion that "Well, I need to maintain my gun" let's make it >regulation that they can carry an UNLOADED firearm home, that it's >only fair that they be just as helpless as poor schmuck coming home >from his computer operator job... > >NRA Director/ex-San Jose cop Leroy Pyle states in the latest SWAT >magazine that anti-cops better watch out for this schism between >RKBA folks and the police. He asks the rhetorical question of 'What >if what's left of the gun lobby starts demanding the disarmament >of the police?" > >Well, I guess anti-gun cops who think only they should be armed, >along with the wealthy and politically connected, should be made >to realize that screwing can cut in ways they have yet to imagine. >...  We all know this will never happen.  Because the Police are under the wings of Government, they will always be considered more important than Citizens.  Government pens, pencils and paper are considered more important than Citizens.
kdw@icd.ab.com (Kenneth D. Whitehead) writes: >Well, after 2 days of hearing that 3 of the BD bodies had >been shot in the head (Horrors!  Another Jonestown! Crazed >Cultists!  Child Abusers!  WHACKOS in Waco!), last night the  >medical examiner was on TV and was pretty vehement in denying >that ANY of them had bullet wounds...  he seemed just a tad upset  >at the Feds for having spread that rumor.    Funny, the medical examiner today stated that there was no evidence ONE WAY or ANOTHER that there were bullet wounds -- not a single autopsy has been performed, so all reports are deemed speculative.  INCLUDING reports that there were NO bullet wounds.  >Before long, I think all the kneejerk government apologists >are going to start getting pretty pissed off at how easily >they were misled.  Before long, I think all the kneejerk conspiracy theorists are going to start getting pretty pissed off at how easily they mislead themselves.  Also, pretty disappointed at being ignored by the coutnry.