--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 275 GUNS Ref: DBZ00026 Date: 07/29/96 From: JOHN PERZ Time: 06:25pm \/To: ALL (Read 1 times) Subj: INFO NEEDED Hi all I'm looking for an up-to-date list of all the state rifle associations that are affiliated with the NRA. In particular, I'd like to find one that includes their email addresses, if they have one. Anyone have such a list, or know a URL where I can get it? Regards John --- WILDMAIL!/WC v4.12 * Origin: Hudson Valley BBS (1:2624/808.0) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 275 GUNS Ref: DBZ00027 Date: 07/28/96 From: STEVE GUNHOUSE Time: 1:11:am \/To: CLOYCE OSBORN (Read 1 times) Subj: Pocket guns -=> Quoting Cloyce Osborn to Steve Gunhouse on 26 Jul 96 18:58 <=- Re: Pocket guns SG> Personally, I opted for a single action - a Colt .380 CO> Many years ago I apprentenced under an old time gunsmith. Since I was CO> the "kid" (and would still be if he were alive), all of the grunt work CO> fell on me. It was very common to have a Colt .25 automatic (a pocket CO> anvil) brought in for servicing, etc. In case you aren't familiar CO> with them, the Colt .25s were basically the Browning .25 wearing Colt CO> markings. They were single action and striker fired (ie: internal CO> mechanism). When one came in, Cecil would hand it to me and say "fix CO> it". I'd ask what was supposed to be wrong with it and he'd reply "I CO> don't know, they just said it ain't working. You find out then fix CO> it." Nearly all of these pistols were scarred up from being carried CO> in pants pockets along with pocket change, keys and pocket knives. A CO> good cleaning usually cured their ailments. CO> One in particular that I remember was brought in by an elderly lady CO> who told us "the Mister left this here for me when he went off to war. CO> He never came back. Now I can't make it work. Please see if you can CO> fix it." I took the pistol and checked the safety. It was on so I CO> tried to thumb it off so I could clear it. No dice - that safety CO> wasn't about to move. I scratched my head a minute then removed the CO> magazine (loaded) and the grip panels then clamped it into a padded CO> vise. I took a brass punch and a small hammer and popped the safety CO> off then disassembled the little pistol. Getting the chambered round CO> out of the barrel involved a brass rod and a hammer. After I got the CO> thing back into reasonable shape she came to pick it up. I asked her CO> "where was the Mister killed, the Pacific?" She said "Oh, no CO> young'un. We weren't fighting in the Pacific then. He was killed CO> during World War One." That gun had been loaded and cocked for nearly CO> 50 years! For the record, I have seen a couple of Colt's, "Baby" Brownings, and even a 1903. Never looked too seriously at any - I don't think much of the .25. I'd have to presume there were other differences between either of those and even a 1911 (besides size and sometimes grip safety). A series 80 ought to be even safer. As Paul said, nothing's perfect, but it ought to be pretty good. Oh, of course the .25 was much smaller. I can't fit too much else in with either the GM .380 or my other one. So, no scars from other items in that pocket - they're all in my other pocket now. Naturally, I'm not going to leave any gun just sit for 50 years. It may rust up (as it seems like the one in the story did), and presumably the springs would weaken. But also, a gun is little use if you don't practice! I take most of my guns to the range at least once a month. (Some not quite that often, there aren't that many days in a month.) And honestly, I'd feel fairly safe carrying off-safe for myself, but for the sake of others I don't. (Yesterday I was carrying my Firestar M-45 instead, just to see what it was like. Of course, that's another "cocked and locked" gun.) Steve ... The greatest sports are said to have danger as a requisite. --- GEcho 1.00 * Origin: Sub-Rosa, for those held in terrestrial bondage. (1:381/74) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 275 GUNS Ref: DBZ00028 Date: 07/28/96 From: STEVE GUNHOUSE Time: 2:00:am \/To: PAUL NIXON (Read 1 times) Subj: Terror -=> Quoting Paul Nixon to Steve Gunhouse on 27 Jul 96 06:46 <=- Re: Terror SG> Did you see the Deep Space 9 episode where the Changelings were PN> I don't seem to be able to catch DS9 on a consistant basis... SG> attacking Earth? That was essentially the point of the episode. If you SG> do all the sweeps and stuff - especially out of proportion to the SG> actual threat - then the terrorists have won. That's not what their SG> hypothetical Earth of the future - or our country now - is about. PN> Agreed. For reference, it was mostly a Psy. Op. They somehow managed to work it so that the wormhole opened many times - later interpretted as a possible fleet of cloaked ships. They caused some small damage, and a certain opportunistic Admiral decided to capitalize on the situation as well. He decided that Earth wasn't tough enough, so he'd use the danger to get his people into positions of authority and to get his "police state" rules accepted - a peaceful military coup, if you will. In part two, they found out there were only 4 Changelings on all of Earth and that they hadn't done some of the more serious damage, and Sisko put the rest together. Sisko's own father was the primary person (whom we saw anyway) protesting the "police state" rules - armed patrols, blood tests, etc. So before he discovered the Admiral's plot, he was torn between his duty to protect the Earth and his father's opinion that he was helping to destroy it. Once the plot was known there was no longer any internal conflict. (Strange how those things always work out so well on TV.) Would have been interesting to see how Sisko resolved the dilemma if there had been no such plot ... but that would probably take a whole season to resolve, not just two shows! PN> We've had how many of these things in the past? We've had how many PN> people killed? Ten or so years ago there were over thirty thousand PN> takeoffs per day. (Most days the same number of landings ) Now PN> that figure has to be much higher today...how many get blown out of PN> the sky? Is this going to degenerate into another "if it saves one PN> life" whine? Or will we see politicritters making more laws...that PN> will have zero effect? PN> We're allowing ourselves to be whipped into a frenzy by the press. PN> I'm gonna suggest that the threat isn't such that we have to hunker PN> in the bunker. Here's the biggest point: so far, we've had almost the least amount of terrorism in the free world. Those places with more terrorism have imposed tough laws, but they have still had more terrorism than us. Just look at Ireland or the West Bank. Obviously the laws aren't addressing the root cause, and so are ineffective. Our laws have so far been better, though sometimes I wonder if it'll last long. Of course, the clincher is that people will take it as just more government tyranny (whether or not that is the intent). They may catch more terrorists, but there will also be more to catch! Steve ... Have you ever killed anyone? Yeah, but they were all bad --- GEcho 1.00 * Origin: Sub-Rosa, for those held in terrestrial bondage. (1:381/74) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 275 GUNS Ref: DBZ00029 Date: 07/30/96 From: WYATT DOOLEY Time: 06:25pm \/To: JOHN PERZ (Read 1 times) Subj: NRA GP> -=> Quoting John Perz to Guy Putnam <=- GP> JP> How about if I call myself a Pragmatic Realist, instead? How does Anti-Gun sound? GP> JP> It's true, as you said, that the lesser of two evils is still evil. GP> JP> It's also true that you can't beat somebody with nobody. either way you go here john you get a whitehouse full of shit and you will lose your rights and the ability to bitch because y asked for it. GP> JP> Come November, I intend to PUNISH Bill Clinton for his past, anti-2nd GP> JP> Ammendment actions. I will do so by casting a vote for the ONE GP> JP> candidate Bill Clinton DOESN'T want me to vote for - the Republican. By putting another Anti-gun politician in office? that's stupid. I intend to punish *Both* of them by voting for someone that thi the same way I do that believes in the same thing that I do and a *Respect for The Constitution and The Bill of Rights* like I d anything else is bullshit do a feces consolidation. we're all about to get screwed without a kiss. All you will ever get from Clinton or Dole is lip service. a cheap hooker could do that with out taking away my rights, and you'll enjoy it more. * OLX 2.2 TD * Bill Clinton is from the Dork Side of the Farce. --- PCBoard (R) v15.22/M 5 * Origin: 1:3821/29 Christian 1 501-776-1546 (1:3821/29) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 275 GUNS Ref: DBZ00030 Date: 07/30/96 From: WYATT DOOLEY Time: 06:25pm \/To: JOHN PERZ (Read 1 times) Subj: you, me & them JP>-> Call's to mind what somebody (Ben Franklin?) said in the 1760's, JP>-> "Gentlemen, we must all hang together, or we will most assuredly all JP>-> be hanged separately" JP>-> I get the impression that the rank and file of shooters paid even JP>-> less attention in history class then I did. :-( JP>Uh Huh. That particular quote is indded Ben Franklin. It is from the JP>debate over Independence, Second Continental Congress, 1776. However they had two choices liberty or the Crown in this election if you vote for a winner you still get an anti-gunner and lose. it's kinda like jumping half way over a barbed wire fence. you can vote for an anti-gunner or for someone who stands for what you believe in......Harry Browne. * OLX 2.2 TD * Bill Clinton is from the Dork Side of the Farce. --- PCBoard (R) v15.22/M 5 * Origin: 1:3821/29 Christian 1 501-776-1546 (1:3821/29) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 275 GUNS Ref: DBZ00031 Date: 07/30/96 From: WYATT DOOLEY Time: 06:25pm \/To: LYLE KNOX (Read 1 times) Subj: RE: CATS LK> WD> because anything that strayed through it was Food. but LK> WD> honestly I could use everything you can send me.. LK>Do you have an Inet e-mail address? I'm much more familiar with sending Inet LK>e-mail than FIDO, but will try the FIDO route if that's all you have. Sorry Lyle All I can do at this time is Fido 1:3821/29 You can crash this system anytime though it's mine. * OLX 2.2 TD * We've met the enemy and he prints your money. --- PCBoard (R) v15.22/M 5 * Origin: 1:3821/29 Christian 1 501-776-1546 (1:3821/29) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 275 GUNS Ref: DBZ00032 Date: 07/30/96 From: WYATT DOOLEY Time: 06:25pm \/To: DAN ARICO (Read 1 times) Subj: Nra DA>I cannot, in good conscience, cooperate with any further gun control. If DA>that leads to a violent confrontation when they try to take away my DA>guns, so be it. Amen and pass the ammunition! * OLX 2.2 TD * We've met the enemy and he prints your money. --- PCBoard (R) v15.22/M 5 * Origin: 1:3821/29 Christian 1 501-776-1546 (1:3821/29) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 275 GUNS Ref: DBZ00033 Date: 07/30/96 From: WYATT DOOLEY Time: 06:25pm \/To: DAVE APPEL (Read 1 times) Subj: Re: TOW DA>Another example: Explosives were not "intended" to heat the ?-rations DA>in Vietnam, but I know a demolitions man who used plenty of it to heat DA>his and his buddies food. C-4 has made a lot of coffee, and it's easier to carry than sterno. DA>As the saying goes, "If it's stupid and it works, it's not stupid." agreed... * OLX 2.2 TD * We've met the enemy and he prints your money. --- PCBoard (R) v15.22/M 5 * Origin: 1:3821/29 Christian 1 501-776-1546 (1:3821/29) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 275 GUNS Ref: DBZ00034 Date: 07/30/96 From: WYATT DOOLEY Time: 06:25pm \/To: DON SHOEBRIDGE (Read 1 times) Subj: We? 1/3 DS>ML> The media has you convinced we can't win so you are going to lay own DS>ML>and quit? That's exactly what they want us to do. DS>Who are you refering to when you say "we"? If you mean Republican, I DS>don't much care if they loose. Democrates, I hope they will loose. DS>But, as for me, I'm one of those that will be accussed of spliting the DS>vote, because I'm voting Libertarian. I'd rather not have either Bob DS>(on the) Dole or Billary Klinton in the White House. Don't think that you are alone here. I will NOT compromise my principals by voting for tweedlebill or tweedlebob. NO Compromises... It simply amazes me that all the people that complain about the NRA compromising our rights away are going to support this weasel. Do a feces consolidation guys you can't have it both ways. You can't vote for Bob Dole and expect your gun rights to stay intact look at his record from the GOA's fax. What a Week -- Dole Supports "Instant" Gun Registration; Sides with Clinton in Veto of Gun Ban Repeal! by Gun Owners of America 8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 (703)321-8585, fax: 321-8408 (Saturday, July 13) -- Former Senator Bob Dole reversed himself yet again on Thursday on the issue of repealing the gun ban. The Washington Times reported yesterday that Dole "changed his position again on a repeal of the assault- weapons ban to support a veto of the GOP-led effort." When GOA staff called to confirm this quote, GOA was told that Dole "supports the Second Amendment." [Editor: That's good; Bill Clinton also "supports" the Second Amendment.] When GOA asked why Sen. Dole did not fulfill his promise and hold a vote on repealing the gun ban, the campaign answered that there were not enough votes to pass the bill. GOA staff then confronted the staff with what seemed to be a bit of hypocrisy. In the Macomb Daily last May 31, it was reported that Dole would schedule a "vote on the balanced budget amendment . . . even though he knows it will fail." On June 7, USA Today quoted Dole as saying, "It's not whether you win or lose [on the balanced budget amendment], but whether you've made the statement." Why not use the same strategy, GOA asked, in regard to our Second Amendment rights and put all the Senators on record? Dole's staff responded that, "The balanced budget was a priority." [Editor: The Second Amendment is not?] Yesterday's Times article also reflected upon how Dole broke his promise to hold a gun vote: Earlier this week, Mr. Dole abandoned his April 1995 pledge to the National Rifle Association to support repeal for the ban on the sale and manufacture of 19 specific assault-style firearms. Mr. Dole yesterday changed his position again and vowed -- as Mr. Clinton already has -- to veto any attempt to repeal the ban. While the above report was disturbing, the following was even more upsetting. The Times reported that, "Mr. Dole went even further, saying he would lobby fellow Republicans to abandon efforts to repeal the ban on assault-style firearms." [This is the same problem that Republicans in Congress faced under President George Bush. Bush lobbied Congressional Republicans to support his gun control efforts. Contrast this to the situation in 1994. Congressional Republicans were free to oppose the anti-gun Democrat in the White House. Not having a Presidential leader from the same Party, Republicans rose up and opposed the gun ban. Even though they initially lost, they made it an issue in the elections and changed the Congress. And of course, changing the Congress is the real answer. Gun owners must work towards a veto-proof Congress.] Instant Check and gun owner registration. On another "gun control front," Dole took credit for the instant "registration" check earlier this week. Calling it the "Dole Instant Check," Dole promised to impose this gun control system upon the states as soon as possible. Many gun authorities have noted that the instant check -- with its potential for illegal gun registration -- is just as dangerous as the waiting period itself. After all, even though it's technically illegal for authorities to record the names of gun buyers after conducting a background check, there is always the danger that authorities will keep the names. (Hasn't "Filegate" taught us that if there is a will to evade privacy protections, there is a way to do it -- despite legal prohibitions?) What if a Craig Livingstone ends up running the instant check? Even the government has admitted that the instant check can result in gun owner registration as a result of the instant check. A Justice Department Task Force stated in 1989 that, "Any system that requires a criminal history record check prior to purchase of a firearm creates the potential for the automated tracking of individuals who seek to purchase firearms." In truth, registration does occur during the instant check. The question is, can one be sure the government will truly get rid of the names after conducting the check? The answer would seem quite doubtful if the people running the check have the integrity of a Bill Clinton or a Craig Livingstone. HERE'S WHAT TO DO: * Call the Bob Dole campaign and express your disappointment that Dole would back off the repeal. Encourage him to also reconsider his position on the instant registration system, and to support the Second and Tenth Amendments together. Contact Dole at ph) 1-800-262-3653, 202-414-6400; fax: 202-414- 6345, 414-8007. * Make sure you have called Western Union (1-800-651-1486) and have sent a mailgram to urge your Congressman to cosponsor H.R. 2470. This bill repeals the waiting period and the instant registration check! ... To receive GOA alerts via e-mail send request to:davisda@rmi.net July 10, 1996 Below is the transcript of Presidential candidate Bob Dole's comments at his press conference on Tuesday, July 9, 1996. NRA Members and gun owners are encouraged to express their views to: the Dole campaign: 202-414-6400 the Republican National Committee: 202-863-8500 and your own Congressman and Senators at 202-224-3121. =+=+=+=+=+ (Introduced by Governor George Allen...) BOB DOLE, Presidential Candidate: (Applause) Thank you...Thank you very much...I appreciate...Thank you very much. Well, let me say I'm very honored to be in your company today and I appreciate very much the very warm welcome not only outdoors, but indoors, I've received. And I'm very honored to be here and, Colonel, I am very happy to see you and be here with the Attorney General of this state. You did a great job, Attorney General Gilmore. And with Bill Barr, a longtime friend of mine who did an outstanding job as US Attorney General. And to be here with George and Susan Allen, and it seems to me that Secretary Gilgore also. This is an opportunity. I don't look upon this as a political statement I'm about to make because it's something I've been doing for a long, long time as the Governor pointed out. I didn't start this last week or last month, thinking it might make a great statement for my Presidential race. I started this a long time ago, back in 1979. And I understood at the time what a gun or an explosive shell could do to someone. I understood that and it seemed to me that what we wanted to do then was to keep guns away from the people who shouldn't have guns. Law abiding citizens are one thing, but others are something else. >>> Continued to next message * OLX 2.2 TD * first I was a prevert then Iwas a pervert now...PROVERT! --- PCBoard (R) v15.22/M 5 * Origin: 1:3821/29 Christian 1 501-776-1546 (1:3821/29) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 275 GUNS Ref: DBZ00035 Date: 07/30/96 From: WYATT DOOLEY Time: 06:25pm \/To: DON SHOEBRIDGE (Read 1 times) Subj: We? 2/3 >>> Continued from previous message So I'm very proud to be also at the Virginia State Police Academy. They tell me that your motto here is, "You can be tough as nails, but still be courteous." I think you've modified that recently, but it's a very good motto. And that's good advice because I think, many times, integrity and quiet dignity can take you far in your life and far in your career. The war against crime and against drugs must be a cooperative effort, it can't be a part in there, it must be a cooperative effort. We need strong laws and we need tough prosecutors, and we need tough and sensible judges. But it's even more important that well trained state police and local police and county sheriffs and all that we have in this room today. Because, as the Governor pointed out, you're the ones who are really on the front lines everyday. Everyday, somebody in this audience takes a risk and you're out there everyday for a reason. Because you believe in what you do, you're proud of what you do, and you understand what would happen without your presence. So all of you at the Academy and on duty across Virginia in whatever capacity, certainly deserve the respect and gratitude of every citizen. Again, as the Governor pointed out, certainly you have mine. I'm an old county attorney. In our little county, we didn't prosecute many people in those days; most of them were bad checks. But we did have violent crime and I must say there's been a change, as the Governor pointed out, in attitudes over the years. In the good old days, we worried about the victims more than the criminals. And then we've had to have security worry more about the criminals than the victims. But now, I believe, because of the leadership of Governor Allen and others in this state and states all across America, we're getting our priorities right again. We concern ourselves, yes, with the rights of defendants. The rights of criminals, but we also concern ourselves with the rights of victims. And I'm a strong believer in the Second Amendment, the right to keep and bear arms, and I have fought many battles over the years to keep the government from infringing on that right. But everybody understands that some people must not own guns, either because they forfeited that right, or for a variety of other very common sense reasons. They shouldn't have guns. And the question is, how can we separate those who may not own guns without infringing on the rights of those who may - the law- abiding citizens - the people the Second Amendment is talking about? And that's what instant check technology is all about. And I came to Virginia today because this is where it started. This is where it started in 1989 and I learned today, Colonel, that it's copyrighted now. The Virginia system is copyrighted. Other states all across America - as the Captain explained to me back here - are using this all across America now what started right here in the State of Virginia. So you've led the nation and, as the Governor pointed out, you can go...In fact, we watched about three transactions before we came in here. Only after you go through a transaction, only after the state finds the buyer eligible, the decision can be sent to the dealer in an average of - I said - about two minutes. The Governor says about three minutes. There was a compromise and we'll say about two and a half minutes. But they were very rapid as we stood there and watched the two or three being checked. In this way you've protected the Second Amendment rights of law abiding Virginians while keeping more than - in fact we have this first chart - more than ten thousand disqualified persons from buying guns. It's more than 10,020-some guns have been kept out of the hands of dangerous criminals and other prohibitive persons through Virginia's instant check program, as the Colonel pointed out earlier, and has prevented a lot of crime. A lot of crime has been prevented because of the Instant Check system in Virginia. What I've been saying way back there, not last week, not yesterday, not the day before, years and years and years ago, that we need a program across America, in this case the same kind of a program. And the current Federal law provides for a five day waiting period for the purchase of hand guns but, as shown on the chart on my left, the so-called "Brady States" - those are twenty-five states that rely on the five day waiting period on my left. The next is the instant check; we have seventeen states now with the instant check. We have so-called "Non-Brady States", those are the ones with the instant check. And with the longer waiting period and the licensing requirements, we have twenty-seven states. So there are already twenty-seven states and territories that are exempt from the federal waiting period. And seventeen of those, as I said, have instant check and that's good news. Because the instant check is a lot more effective than a waiting period and screening out those who are legally prohibited from buying a gun. And after all, the Brady Law doesn't guarantee a background check in every case. The law requires only that law enforcement make "reasonable efforts" - quote - reasonable efforts to find out whether someone has the right to buy a gun and even that provision may be an unconscionable burden on the states as one Federal Court of Appeals has already held and it's now going to go to the Supreme Court to decide. Under the instant check...I want to try to make this distinction for the media because I know they'd like to write off the Brady Bill and the assault weapons. We've got to talk about getting to the root of the problem. Under the instant check, we'll have a guaranteed background check every time a purchase is attempted - one big difference. As I said, I have supported it for almost twenty years. I sponsored the law setting up the Interstate Identification Index which is part of the FBI's National Crime Information Center. We've got millions of names there of people who shouldn't have guns. And once all fifty states are tied in as Virginia is, it's going to have a big, big impact. And it's long been my view that we ought to have this national instant check program. Eight years ago, I introduced legislation aimed at having instant check not for some, but for all firearm purchases, all guns. All guns, underscored and underlined. The bill passed. Under the Brady Bill, the instant check system is supposed to be up and running by the end of 1998 when the five day waiting period is phased out. But I must say, regrettably for the past three years, we haven't been doing much to get it in place by the year 1998. They're still studying the issue and I believe at the rate we're going, we're going to miss that target date by a long, long time. Of course, there'd be another Administration - I'll talk about that in a minute. But the Clinton Administration needs to get off the dime. There is no good reason we can't have a system like Virginia's at the federal level and we can. And my Administration will be committed to having a national instant check system online across America in fifty states. And not just by the end of 1998. If we give it the attention it deserves - and, as President, I will - we can beat that deadline by a full year. We'll have the system ready with all fifty states plugged into a national database of relevant information about those who shouldn't own guns. And we'll do it by the end of 1997, not 1998, but 1997. Into my first year in the White House. Now, how are we going to get the job done? Well first, I will sign an Executive Order in January, 1997 directing an immediate review of federal and state instant check efforts and my Attorney General will then convene a conference of law enforcement organizations across America early next year to find the best way to get all of them hooked up to the national system. Without wasting any time, without any more studies, without --- PCBoard (R) v15.22/M 5 * Origin: 1:3821/29 Christian 1 501-776-1546 (1:3821/29)