STOP Traver NOW
Boris Kapusta
President Barack Obama has nominated anti-gun extremist Andrew Traver
to be Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and
Explosives (BATFE).
Your Senators need to hear from YOU!
As BATFE Director, Traver would have enormous power to:
-Harass gun owners;
-Put gun stores out of business;
-Regulate and restrict gun ownership for law-abiding Americans.
Every gun-ban group and politician in the nation is rallying behind
Obama's Traver nomination. The Senate may vote to confirm him any day
now.
F. George McDuffee
==========
Its nice that you posted this. The people on the NGs that
wish to write their Senators may find the following helpful
To locate your senators and access their web mail goto
http://senate.gov/
Be sure to bookmark your senators' webmail pages for easy
future nagging.
Feel free to use any, part or none of the following email I
sent my Senators:
----- start of email
JUST SAY NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Re: Andrew Traver as head of BATFE
The BATFE is a critical agency of the U.S. government, and
must be led by an individual with knowledge of and respect
for the laws and Constitution of the United States, not a
self proclaimed anti-gun fanatic if they are to adequately
and effectively accomplish their assigned mission, rather
than engaging in implementation of personal agendas.
The BATFE has a long history as a hotdog or cowboy agency,
and is directly accountable for the serious injury and
deaths of numerous innocent American citizens including
women and children, from Ken Balew to Waco and Ruby Ridge.
The BATFE also extensively uses entrapment, paid/suborned
informants and other highly questionable and/or illegal
secret police tactics that have no place in American
government.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,983227,00.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_Ridge
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/03/08/eveningnews/main20040803.shtml?tag=cbsnewsTwoColUpperPromoArea
Mr. Traver is far too closely aligned and associated with
the BATFE to provide the firm discipline and control that is
vital for this powerful agency with a history of abuses and
rogue actions.
http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm/1110/lock_and_load_49c55324-c08a-4364-99f8-1a5d8fcacf6d.html
It is therefore vital that this nomination be blocked,
possibly by a "hold" to prevent the confirmation hearings.
----- end of email
-- Unka George (George McDuffee)
..............................
The past is a foreign country;
they do things differently there.
L. P. Hartley (1895-1972), British author.
The Go-Between, Prologue (1953).
Rich Grise
>
> Feel free to use any, part or none of the following email I
> sent my Senators:
>
> ----- start of email
> JUST SAY NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> Re: Andrew Traver as head of BATFE
>
> The BATFE is a critical agency of the U.S. government, and
> must be led by an individual with knowledge of and respect
> for the laws and Constitution of the United States, not a
> self proclaimed anti-gun fanatic if they are to adequately
> and effectively accomplish their assigned mission, rather
> than engaging in implementation of personal agendas.
What, exactly, is "their assigned mission," If not to institutionally
rape the Bill of Rights?
Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives should be aisles in the
local convenience store, not a federal bureaucracy[1].
Hope This Helps!
Richard the Dreaded Libertarian
[1] Not original from me, but I don't remember from whom I lifted it.
T.T.
>> >> self proclaimed anti-gun fanatic ?
I am much more afraid of a self-proclaimed pro-gun fanatic.
F. George McDuffee
<ri...@example.net.invalid> wrote:
>F. George McDuffee wrote:
>>
>> Feel free to use any, part or none of the following email I
>> sent my Senators:
>>
>> ----- start of email
>> JUST SAY NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>> Re: Andrew Traver as head of BATFE
>>
>> The BATFE is a critical agency of the U.S. government, and
>> must be led by an individual with knowledge of and respect
>> for the laws and Constitution of the United States, not a
>> self proclaimed anti-gun fanatic if they are to adequately
>> and effectively accomplish their assigned mission, rather
>> than engaging in implementation of personal agendas.
>
>What, exactly, is "their assigned mission," If not to institutionally
>rape the Bill of Rights?
>
<snip>
==========
http://www.atf.gov/publications/download/sp/2004-2009/2004-2009-strategic-plan-vision-mission.pdf
http://www.atf.gov/publications/download/sp/2000-2005/2000-2005-strategic-plan-complete.pdf
http://www.justice.gov/oig/reports/ATF/e0406/intro.htm
http://www.justice.gov/oig/reports/ATF/e0707/final.pdf
However be reminded:
"What you do speaks so loudly I can't hear what you say."
Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
Rich Grise
When you're assaulted in the parking lot at night by a drug-crazed
gang-banger, which one would you rather have at your side?
Good Luck!
Rich
azotic
"Rich Grise" <ri...@example.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:il7aiv$b54$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
His mommy won't let him out after dark.........
Best Regards
Tom.
Beryl
And you're also put at risk by the nervous pro-gun fanatic who mistakes
you for a gang-banger. People are normally paranoid of approaching
strangers in dark parking lots.
Tip: If a lady dings your car in traffic, DON'T stride over and yell at
her through her window. She's going to be scared, and she does have a gun.
steamer
--
"Steamboat Ed" Haas : Steel, Stainless, Titanium:
Hacking the Trailing Edge! : Guaranteed Uncertified Welding!
www.nmpproducts.com
---Decks a-wash in a sea of words---
Quadibloc
> President Barack Obama has nominated anti-gun extremist Andrew Traver
> to be Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and
> Explosives (BATFE).
I don't know about misc.survivalism, but this is off-topic for
sci.astro.amateur and rec.crafts.metalworking.
John Savard
Wes
Prove that. Please cite cases where CCW holders have misbehaved. I'll be waiting.
Wes
--
"Additionally as a security officer, I carry a gun to protect
government officials but my life isn't worth protecting at home
in their eyes." Dick Anthony Heller
Ed Huntress
"Wes" <ClutchAtL...@Gmail.com> wrote in message
news:a8Udp.701896$Bh.5...@en-nntp-12.dc1.easynews.com...
> Beryl <fo...@rd.net> wrote:
>
>>Rich Grise wrote:
>>> T.T. wrote:
>>>> snip
>>>>>>>> self proclaimed anti-gun fanatic ?
>>>> I am much more afraid of a self-proclaimed pro-gun fanatic.
>>>
>>> When you're assaulted in the parking lot at night by a drug-crazed
>>> gang-banger, which one would you rather have at your side?
>>
>>And you're also put at risk by the nervous pro-gun fanatic who mistakes
>>you for a gang-banger. People are normally paranoid of approaching
>>strangers in dark parking lots.
>>
>>
>>Tip: If a lady dings your car in traffic, DON'T stride over and yell at
>>her through her window. She's going to be scared, and she does have a gun.
>
> Prove that. Please cite cases where CCW holders have misbehaved. I'll be
> waiting.
Oh, Jesus, Wes. You've fallen into the tank.
CCW holders have killed 9 cops and something like 250 private citizens. You
can track them down, and sort out the legit self-defense cases,
state-by-state.
Don't knock the source. After all, you aren't going to read about these
cases in the _American Rifleman_. <g> They give you plenty of documentation
to track them down yourself. I'll help if you want. d8-)
http://www.vpc.org/ccwkillers.htm
http://www.vpc.org/ccwkillers.htm
http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/ccwtotalkilled.pdf
PrecisionmachinisT
"Wes" <ClutchAtL...@Gmail.com> wrote in message
news:a8Udp.701896$Bh.5...@en-nntp-12.dc1.easynews.com...
>
>>Rich Grise wrote:
>>> T.T. wrote:
>>>> snip
>>>>>>>> self proclaimed anti-gun fanatic ?
>>>> I am much more afraid of a self-proclaimed pro-gun fanatic.
>>>
>>> When you're assaulted in the parking lot at night by a drug-crazed
>>> gang-banger, which one would you rather have at your side?
>>
>>And you're also put at risk by the nervous pro-gun fanatic who mistakes
>>you for a gang-banger. People are normally paranoid of approaching
>>strangers in dark parking lots.
>>
>>
>>Tip: If a lady dings your car in traffic, DON'T stride over and yell at
>>her through her window. She's going to be scared, and she does have a gun.
>
> Prove that. Please cite cases where CCW holders have misbehaved. I'll be
> waiting.
>
>
My wife got all freaked about 20 years ago turned out it was a drunk cop cut
her off it was a fender bender he then came to apologize and she saw him
stuffing his pistol into his waist band....
But I guess cops are basically dusche bags as compared to your ordinary CCW
holders..
Outlaw CCW and only criminals will carry concealed...
FWIW, It's open carry here where I live
--and occasionally, I do--no reason to hide the fact.
--
Tom Gardner
"Wes" <ClutchAtL...@Gmail.com> wrote in message
news:a8Udp.701896$Bh.5...@en-nntp-12.dc1.easynews.com...
>
>>Rich Grise wrote:
>>> T.T. wrote:
>>>> snip
>>>>>>>> self proclaimed anti-gun fanatic ?
>>>> I am much more afraid of a self-proclaimed pro-gun fanatic.
>>>
>>> When you're assaulted in the parking lot at night by a drug-crazed
>>> gang-banger, which one would you rather have at your side?
>>
>>And you're also put at risk by the nervous pro-gun fanatic who mistakes
>>you for a gang-banger. People are normally paranoid of approaching
>>strangers in dark parking lots.
>>
>>
>>Tip: If a lady dings your car in traffic, DON'T stride over and yell at
>>her through her window. She's going to be scared, and she does have a gun.
>
> Prove that. Please cite cases where CCW holders have misbehaved. I'll be waiting.
>
> Wes
There are some ccw permit holders that have gone off. A tiny percentage compared to
just about any other demographic, about the same as a long weekend in a Democratic
controlled city like Chicago. I think the next lowest demographic group that commits
any crime is "Nuns over 70 years old". For a good dose of contrast, look up how many
blacks (or any other group) commit gun crimes. Let the anti-gunners rant, they have
already lost the argument. Some say that there are MILLIONS of murders and other
violent crimes PREVENTED by ccw holders every year and those go unreported. Leftists
hate guns because they can't stand the thought of somebody not being totally under
their control.
Beryl
> Beryl <fo...@rd.net> wrote:
>
>> Rich Grise wrote:
>>> T.T. wrote:
>>>> snip
>>>>>>>> self proclaimed anti-gun fanatic ?
>>>> I am much more afraid of a self-proclaimed pro-gun fanatic.
>>> When you're assaulted in the parking lot at night by a drug-crazed
>>> gang-banger, which one would you rather have at your side?
>> And you're also put at risk by the nervous pro-gun fanatic who mistakes
>> you for a gang-banger. People are normally paranoid of approaching
>> strangers in dark parking lots.
>>
>>
>> Tip: If a lady dings your car in traffic, DON'T stride over and yell at
>> her through her window. She's going to be scared, and she does have a gun.
>
> Prove that. Please cite cases where CCW holders have misbehaved. I'll be waiting.
>
> Wes
You narrowed the thread down to a concealed weapons argument.
PrecisionmachinisT
"Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:4d781260$0$3967$607e...@cv.net...
http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2010/12/22-2
--
Ed Huntress
"PrecisionmachinisT" <precision...@notmail.com> wrote in message
news:sNOdnSLyteKHoeTQ...@scnresearch.com...
Wphew, it's a good thing they were background-checked and trained, or who
knows what would have happened.
--
Ed Huntress
David R. Birch
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Are you saying that CCW
shouldn't exist because a few have abused their 2nd Amendment rights?
David
Ed Huntress
"David R. Birch" <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote in message
news:ilc29...@news2.newsguy.com...
I'm not trying to make a point. That was verbal irony. If you want to make a
point out of it, the point would be that even background checking and
training (if required in a given situation) doesn't keep people from using
the guns they carry, legally and with the imprimatur of the CCW, to shoot
innocent people. That was the implication of Wes's original challenge and
the source of the irony.
If I were making a point, it wouldn't be a simple one. But there is a simple
question that pretty well summarizes it: If one is to say that the number of
shootings of innocent victims by CCW holders is low, or that their
"percentage" is low, the question raised is, "Compared to what?"
--
Ed Huntress
David R. Birch
>>> Wphew, it's a good thing they were background-checked and trained, or who
>>> knows what would have happened.
>>
>> I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Are you saying that CCW
>> shouldn't exist because a few have abused their 2nd Amendment rights?
>>
>> David
>
> I'm not trying to make a point. That was verbal irony. If you want to make a
> point out of it, the point would be that even background checking and
> training (if required in a given situation) doesn't keep people from using
> the guns they carry, legally and with the imprimatur of the CCW, to shoot
> innocent people. That was the implication of Wes's original challenge and
> the source of the irony.
>
> If I were making a point, it wouldn't be a simple one. But there is a simple
> question that pretty well summarizes it: If one is to say that the number of
> shootings of innocent victims by CCW holders is low, or that their
> "percentage" is low, the question raised is, "Compared to what?"
How about "compared to the general US population" or compared to "cops
on duty" or "cops off duty"? No, I don't have cites for these comparisons.
Do you think VPC stats are any less biased than NRA stats?
I would feel safer in an environment where CCW existed, even though only
a small percentage choose to do so and a much smaller percentage have
abused that right.
But I live in Wisconsin.
David
Ed Huntress
> On 3/10/2011 9:10 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
>
>>>> Wphew, it's a good thing they were background-checked and trained, or
>>>> who
>>>> knows what would have happened.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Are you saying that CCW
>>> shouldn't exist because a few have abused their 2nd Amendment rights?
>>>
>>> David
>>
>> I'm not trying to make a point. That was verbal irony. If you want to
>> make a
>> point out of it, the point would be that even background checking and
>> training (if required in a given situation) doesn't keep people from
>> using
>> the guns they carry, legally and with the imprimatur of the CCW, to shoot
>> innocent people. That was the implication of Wes's original challenge and
>> the source of the irony.
>>
>> If I were making a point, it wouldn't be a simple one. But there is a
>> simple
>> question that pretty well summarizes it: If one is to say that the number
>> of
>> shootings of innocent victims by CCW holders is low, or that their
>> "percentage" is low, the question raised is, "Compared to what?"
>
I have those stats. I'll supply them if you think this is the appropriate
comparison. You won't like the numbers.
> or compared to "cops on duty" or "cops off duty"? No, I don't have cites
> for these comparisons
I'll look them up, if you think THESE are appropriate comparisons.
Personally, I don't think they are, because cops, on duty or off, are
expected to insert themselves intentionally into many threatening
situations.
>
> Do you think VPC stats are any less biased than NRA stats?
Probably just as much. As I said, they supply plenty of documentation to
check them out. I checked out 6, all of which were accurate.
>
> I would feel safer in an environment where CCW existed, even though only a
> small percentage choose to do so and a much smaller percentage have abused
> that right.
>
> But I live in Wisconsin.
>
> David
I don't think there's any increase at all in the general level of safety
resulting from an *environment* where CCW existed. We ran these numbers
before, and there are studies done by others, that suggest it has no effect.
However, in some situations, I might feel safer if *I* were the one
carrying. To me, it's a personal issue of self-defense, and I favor a right
to carry. But the social effect appears to be minimal or nonexistent. For
one thing, in states with CCW, the percent of permit holders typically is
only two or three percent of the adult population, and most of those are NOT
carrying at any given time. So it's not much of a deterrent.
--
Ed Huntress
Wes
>> Do you think VPC stats are any less biased than NRA stats?
>
>Probably just as much. As I said, they supply plenty of documentation to
>check them out. I checked out 6, all of which were accurate.
A number of them have not been fully adjucated so counting them is a bit of deception.
Charged is not convicted.
I tried running some down that lead to dead ends. Sure there were some that hit pay dirt
but it is hard to tell if the person actually had a carry permit or was carrying under
Constitutional carry which is in effect in Arizona. Think of that lady member of Congress
that was shot by a nut case.
That was an interesting case. One person with a carry permit indicates he was near
shooting another person with a gun which turns out to be some one that had been part of
taking the gun away from the bad guy. I've had training, it was drilled into me that just
because there is a shooting, the person with the gun isn't always the bad guy, expecially
if you wander into an act in progress.
There was a series of podcasts from a panel at Cooley Law in Michigan, you may or may not
want to give it a listen. Pro and anti carry types made their arguments.
http://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/traffic.libsyn.com/gunrights/GRA-136.mp3
http://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/traffic.libsyn.com/gunrights/GRA-137.mp3
http://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/traffic.libsyn.com/gunrights/GRA-138.mp3
Michigan is fairly strict as far as carry permits even though it is a shall issue state. I
plan to review the Michigan State Police yearly report in the near future so see how well
people in my state are behaving.
I'm working 13 days out of 14 right now so it may take a few weeks to get to this.
Ed Huntress
"Wes" <ClutchAtL...@Gmail.com> wrote in message
> "Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>>> Do you think VPC stats are any less biased than NRA stats?
>>
>>Probably just as much. As I said, they supply plenty of documentation to
>>check them out. I checked out 6, all of which were accurate.
>
> A number of them have not been fully adjucated so counting them is a bit
> of deception.
> Charged is not convicted.
There's always hope, Wes, that the numbers may turn out to be fewer than for
the general population, after adjudication. Bullet holes in the flesh are
pretty good evidence but you never know. If you look at the numbers against
the overall adult population, however, you won't place any bets.
>
> I tried running some down that lead to dead ends. Sure there were some
> that hit pay dirt
> but it is hard to tell if the person actually had a carry permit or was
> carrying under
> Constitutional carry which is in effect in Arizona. Think of that lady
> member of Congress
> that was shot by a nut case.
That's not hard to check out. Which ones? I'll be glad to take a look.
>
> That was an interesting case. One person with a carry permit indicates he
> was near
> shooting another person with a gun which turns out to be some one that had
> been part of
> taking the gun away from the bad guy. I've had training, it was drilled
> into me that just
> because there is a shooting, the person with the gun isn't always the bad
> guy, expecially
> if you wander into an act in progress.
>
> There was a series of podcasts from a panel at Cooley Law in Michigan, you
> may or may not
> want to give it a listen. Pro and anti carry types made their arguments.
>
> http://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/traffic.libsyn.com/gunrights/GRA-136.mp3
> http://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/traffic.libsyn.com/gunrights/GRA-137.mp3
> http://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/traffic.libsyn.com/gunrights/GRA-138.mp3
>
> Michigan is fairly strict as far as carry permits even though it is a
> shall issue state. I
> plan to review the Michigan State Police yearly report in the near future
> so see how well
> people in my state are behaving.
>
> I'm working 13 days out of 14 right now so it may take a few weeks to get
> to this.
Ouch! I'll get you started, then. There are approximately 6 million CCW
licensees in the United States. They range from Texas, which is somewhere
around 700,000, to NJ (may-issue, but abandon hope), which is about 1,000.
Overall, CCW holders don't seem to act much differently than other adults
who have no felony convictions or mental health problems. But the CCW
holders are the ones carrying the guns, so....
--
Ed Huntress
Wes
>Overall, CCW holders don't seem to act much differently than other adults
>who have no felony convictions or mental health problems. But the CCW
>holders are the ones carrying the guns, so....
Really? By the time you go though the hoops, pay the expense of training and buying
permission for a period of time, are you are saying that between that group of people that
went the extra miles there isn't any difference between them and the generally law abiding
that have no idea of the legal structures around the use or display of deadly force?
Ed Huntress
"Wes" <ClutchAtL...@Gmail.com> wrote in message
> "Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>>Overall, CCW holders don't seem to act much differently than other adults
>>who have no felony convictions or mental health problems. But the CCW
>>holders are the ones carrying the guns, so....
>
> Really? By the time you go though the hoops, pay the expense of training
> and buying
> permission for a period of time, are you are saying that between that
> group of people that
> went the extra miles there isn't any difference between them and the
> generally law abiding
> that have no idea of the legal structures around the use or display of
> deadly force?
I'm talking about their behavior, not their training. Do you want the
numbers on shooting cops?
--
Ed Huntress
John R. Carroll
> "Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>> Overall, CCW holders don't seem to act much differently than other
>> adults who have no felony convictions or mental health problems. But
>> the CCW holders are the ones carrying the guns, so....
>
> Really? By the time you go though the hoops, pay the expense of
> training and buying permission for a period of time, are you are
> saying that between that group of people that went the extra miles
> there isn't any difference between them and the generally law abiding
> that have no idea of the legal structures around the use or display
> of deadly force?
Why would there be, Wes?
I'd be willing to bet that those that haven't bothered with the legalities
but fear consequences are much more likely to behave themselves.
Anyone bothering with the legal crap wants it too bad.
--
John R. Carroll
J. D. Slocomb
Number of firearm deaths in New Hampshire, maybe?
Cheers,
John D. Slocomb
(jdslocombatgmail)
Ed Huntress
"J. D. Slocomb" <jdsl...@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:191sn6pmprmsgc759...@4ax.com...
Or New Jersey, which is lower still (per capita)
--
Ed Huntress
J. D. Slocomb
But, I believe, that the gun laws are far more lenient in N.H.
Ed Huntress
Absolutely. There aren't many tougher than NJ. We have only around 1,000 CCW
permit holders, and a large number of them are involved in security jobs.
It annoys a lot of gun nutz that we have tough gun laws and low rates of
people getting shot. It just doesn't compute in their "more guns, less
crime" fantasy. And we have a few decrepit cities, more or less shooting
galleries, which ought to raise our state average far higher than it is.
--
Ed Huntress
John
The reason NJ has a low rate of people getting shot is that after they
kill them they get hauled out to PA and get dumped in one of the
stripping holes. :)
John
Ed Huntress
"John" <amd...@intergrafix.net> wrote in message
news:MKOdnYL_srXkgh3Q...@giganews.com...
<g> I always figured it was because we don't get enough practice. We're
shooting up a storm, but nobody can hit anything...
--
Ed Huntress
Doc
news:MKOdnYL_srXkgh3Q...@giganews.com:
>
> The reason NJ has a low rate of people getting shot is that after
> they kill them they get hauled out to PA and get dumped in one of the
> stripping holes. :)
>
> John
That is patently untrue. With the pine barrens a mere 30 minutes from Phili
and readily accessable from the New York area, it offers the finest dumping
available in the eastern U.S. and has a long, proud history of offering
discrete services as necessary.
Home of Jimmy Hoffa and countless (an uncounted) others.
John
Judge Crater?
John
John
On second thought they think they might have found Judge Crater in
Coney Island.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,166191,00.html
John