Feb2002

__________________________________________________________________________________________

The Armed M is a publication of the 2nd Amendment SIG, a special interest group of American Mensa Ltd. Opinions expressed herein are the opinions of the writers, and not of American Mensa, Ltd., which has no opinions. This newsletter is linked to the Mensa web page WWW.Mensa.org as WWW.webcatt.com/2ndAmend_SIG

I have moved and am now in Wilmington North Carolina. My E-Mail address is Smith13@att.net. I can always use contributions to the newsletter. If you write something or find something e-mail it to me I'll put it in the newsletter as space and theme allows. Bob Smith -----

I have been having problems with ATT Internet service. They put a sieve on e-mail limiting address to twenty-five. I couldn’t just split the mailing list because by anti virus does not like sending repeat messages. I think I have it all fixed. I was deeply mistaken when I wrote this. I will be using juno who lets me do 50 at a time. Juno doesn’t give me opportunity to do to hide recipient so you will lose some of your privacy. Sorry about that.

__________________________________________________________________________________________

Injectable chip opens door to 'human bar code' By Charles J. Murray (01/07/02, 12:38 p.m. EST)

Radio-frequency identification chips, which have found a home in applications ranging from toll road passes to smart retail shelves, may be close to taking up residence in the human body.

A Florida-based company has introduced a passive RFID chip that is compatible with human tissue, and the developer is proposing the chip for use on implantable pacemakers, defibrillators and artificial joints. The company, Applied Digital Solutions (Palm Beach, Fla.), also said that the chip could be injected through a syringe and used as a sort of "human bar code" in security applications.

(Editors note: About 15 years ago I friend of mine put a computer chip on the visual cortex of a monkey. He could see what the monkey saw and make the monkey see what he wanted. The chip wasn’t compatible and failed in about ten days.”

Called the VeriChip, the device could open up a broad new segment for the $900 million-a-year RFID business, especially if society embraces the idea of using microchips for human identification. Applied Digital executives ultimately believe that the worldwide market for such implantable chips could reach $70 billion per year.

"The human market for this technology could be huge," said Keith Bolton, senior vice president of technology development at the company.

Futurists agree that the idea of using microchips inside the body could ultimately represent a large market opportunity, but they doubt whether this initial effort will have a significant effect on the RFID market.

"Are we going to see chips embedded in the human body? You bet we are," said Paul Saffo, a director of The Institute for the Future (Menlo Park, Calif.). "But it isn't going to happen overnight."

Pacemaker helper

Still, Applied Digital Solutions' executives are preparing to sell between $2.5 million and $5 million worth of VeriChips in 2002. The company initially plans to sell the chips in South America and Europe for use with pacemakers and defibrillators. In that application, it could be attached to the outside of the heart device or implanted nearby in the body.
Doing so would enable medical personnel to identify and monitor a patient's implanted devices merely by running a handheld scanner over the patient's chest. "If you're a pacemaker user and you're in an accident and in shock, an ambulance attendant could scan the body and retrieve information about the device," Bolton said. "The chip could provide information about the [pacemaker's] settings, who its manufacturer is and whether you have any medical allergies."

The company said it is working with makers of implantable pacemakers and defibrillators to incorporate the chip during the equipment-manufacturing process.

Applied Digital Solutions is awaiting approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and does not expect to sell the chips in the United States until that approval is granted. The company's engineers said they expect approval later this year.

The announcement of the chip's availability created a media stir, however — not because of its potential use with pacemakers but because of its science-fiction-like potential application in human identification systems. Because the microchip and its antenna measure just 11.1 x 2.1 mm, Applied Digital Solutions said the assembly can be injected through a syringe and implanted in various locations within the body.

The tube-shaped VeriChip includes a memory that holds 128 characters of information, an electromagnetic coil for transmitting data and a tuning capacitor, all encapsulated within a silicone-and-glass enclosure. The passive RF unit, which operates at 125 kHz, is activated by moving a company-designed scanner within about a foot of the chip. Doing so excites the coil and "wakes up" the chip, enabling it to transmit data.

The chips are said to be similar to those that are already implanted in about a million dogs and cats nationwide to enable pet owners to identify and reclaim animals that have been temporarily lost. Applied Digital Solutions, which has made the pet-tracking chips for several years, says that the human chips differ mainly in the biocompatible coating that's used to keep the body from rejecting the implanted chip. The VeriChip is believed to be the first such chip designed for human identification.

Inspired by Sept. 11

In September, Applied Digital Solutions implanted its first human chip when a New Jersey surgeon, Richard Seelig, injected two of the chips into himself. He placed one chip in his left forearm and the other near the artificial hip in his right leg.

"He was motivated after he saw firefighters at the World Trade Center in September writing their Social Security numbers on their forearms with Magic Markers," Bolton said. "He thought that there had to be a more sophisticated way of doing an identification." Applied Digital said Seelig, who serves as a medical consultant to the company, has now had the chips implanted in him for three months with no signs of rejection or infection.

Ordinarily, the company said, the chips would be implanted in a doctor's office under local anesthesia.

Applied Digital's executives said the ability to inject the chips opens up a variety of RFID applications in high-security situations, as well other types of human identification systems. The chips, they said, could be implanted in young children or in adults with Alzheimer's disease, to help officials identify people who can't identify themselves.

But the company is backing away from involuntary identification applications, such the tracking of prisoners or parolees. "We are advocating that this technology be totally voluntary," Bolton said.
Whether the technology will boost the market for RFID chips remains uncertain. Industry analysts had assumed that by now RFID would constitute a far larger market than its current, $900 million annual tally.

Applied Digital nonetheless has high hopes for its RFID technology. The publicly held company's stock did not fare well last year, plummeting from a high of $3 a share on Feb. 7 to 11 cents per share on Sept. 17. But its per-share stock price jumped to 50 cents from 38 cents after the company announced the VeriChip.

Eventual adoption

Analysts expressed confidence that the concept would eventually be adopted but were skeptical about its immediate future. "For this to work, you are going to need a standard that everyone agrees to," said Saffo of The Institute for the Future. "Then you have to convince people to buy reading devices that may be fairly costly."

Applied Digital's engineers would not say how much the chips or handheld readers might cost. The company's reader is a proprietary unit that is required for use with the VeriChip.

Some further suggested that the chip might be too large for easy adoption. Veterinarians who have implanted the chips in dogs and cats say that the techniques used in animals are unlikely to be embraced by humans. "The needle is huge," said Dean Christopoulos, a veterinarian in Des Plaines, Ill. "It's almost as thick as your pinky."

Some engineers suggested the technology might ultimately be scaled down, making the chip's acceptance more likely. At Alien Technology Corp. (Morgan Hill, Calif.), engineers have already discussed using that company's ultrasmall RFID chips in human applications. Alien, which uses a process known as fluidic self-assembly to create chips measuring 350 x 350 microns, has demonstrated its 900-MHz technology on everyday products such as soap and shampoo bottles. The coded information can be detected and read across distances measuring almost 3 feet.

"There are companies making RFID tags that are much smaller than a couple of millimeters," said Andy Holman, director of business development for Alien Technology.

Analysts also suggested that human identification technology would be more likely to be popularized when engineers are able to integrate more memory and other features, such as global-positioning satellite units and induction-based power-recharging techniques. GPS might help find lost children and adults, they said, while larger memories would enable doctors to store vital patient information.

The concept "goes all the way back to the 1960s," said Jerry Krasner, vice president of market intelligence for American Technology International Inc.'s Embedded Forecasters Group. "What's new is the ability to store a lot of data. "As soon as you can do that, you'll see more applications for this type of technology," he said.

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Excerpt: 'To imagine a world with no guns is to imagine a world in which the strong rule the weak, in which women are dominated by men, and in which minorities are easily abused or mass-murdered by majorities. Practically speaking, a firearm is the only weapon that allows a weaker person to defend himself from a larger, stronger group of attackers, and to do so at a distance. As George Orwell observed, a weapon like a rifle "gives claws to the weak."'

For some insight into the one country that "successfully" banned all guns, see the information below on feudal Japan. Not exactly the kind of society anyone We At Them imagine anyone yearning for.

By Dave Kopel, Paul Gallant, and Joanne Eisen of the Independence Institute December 5, 2001 9:40 a.m.

Imagine the world without guns" was a bumper sticker that began making the rounds after the murder of ex-Beatle John Lennon on December 18, 1980. Last year, Lennon's widow, Yoko Ono, followed up on that sentiment by announcing she would become a spokeswoman for Handgun Control, Inc. (which later changed its name to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, and which was previously named the National Council to Control Handguns).

So let's try hard to imagine what a world without guns would look like. It isn't hard to do. But be forewarned: It's not a pretty picture.

The way to get to a gun-free world, the gun-prohibition groups tell us, is to pass laws banning them. We can begin by imagining the enactment of laws which ban all non-government possession of firearms.

It's not likely that local bans will do the job. Take, for example, New York's 1911 Sullivan Law, which imposed an exceedingly restrictive handgun-licensing scheme on New York City. In recent decades, administrative abuses have turned the licensing statute into what amounts to prohibition, except for tenacious people who navigate a deliberately obstructive licensing system.

Laws affect mainly those willing to obey them. And where there's an unfulfilled need - and money to be made - there's usually a way around the law. Enter the black market, which flourishes all the more vigorously with ever-increasing restrictions and prohibitions. In TV commercials that aired last August, New York City Republican (sort of) mayoral candidate Mike Bloomberg informed voters that "in 1993, there were as many as 2 million illegal guns on the street." The insinuation was that all those guns were in the hands of criminals, and the implication was that confiscating the guns would make the city a safer place. What Bloomberg never explained was how he planned to shut down the black market.

Then again, heroin and cocaine have been illegal in the United States, and most of the world, for nearly a century. Huge resources have been devoted to suppressing their production, sale, and use, and many innocent people have been sacrificed in the crossfire of the "drug war." Yet heroin and cocaine are readily available on the streets of almost all large American cities, and at prices that today are lower than in previous decades.

Perhaps a global prohibition law isn't good enough. Maybe imposing the harshest penalty possible for violation of such a law will give it real teeth: mandatory life in prison for possession of a gun, or even for possession of a single bullet. (We won't imagine the death penalty, since the Yoko crowd doesn't like the death penalty.)

On second thought, Jamaica's Gun Court Act of 1974 contained just such a penalty, and even that wasn't sufficient. On August 18, 2001, Jamaican Melville Cooke observed that today, "the only people who do not have an illegal firearm [in this country], are those who do not want one." Violent crime in Jamaica is worse than ever, as gangsters and trigger-happy police commit homicides with impunity, and only the law-abiding are disarmed.

Yet the Jamaican government wants to globalize its failed policy. In July 2001, Burchell Whiteman, Jamaica's Minister of Education, Youth and Culture spoke at the U.N. Disarmament Conference to demand the "implementation of measures that would limit the production of weapons to levels that meet the needs for defence and national security."

And as long as governments are allowed to have guns, there will be gun factories to steal from. Some of these factories might have adequate security measures to prevent theft, including theft by employees. But in a world with about 200 nations, most of them governed by kleptocracies, it's preposterous to imagine that some of those "government-only" factories won't become suppliers for the black market. Alternatively, corrupt military and police could supply firearms to the black market.

We'd better revise our strategy. Rather than wishing for laws (which cannot, even imaginably, create a gun-free world), let's be more ambitious, and imagine that all guns vanish. Even guns possessed by government agents. And let's close all the gun factories, too. That ought to put the black market out of business.

Back to the Drawing Board Then again..it's not very difficult to make a workable firearm. As J. David Truby points out in his book Zips, Pipes, and Pens: Arsenal of Improvised Weapons, "Today, all of the improvised/modified designs [of firearms] remain well within the accomplishment of the mechanically unskilled citizen who does not have access to firearms through other means."

In the article "Gun-Making as a Cottage Industry," Charles Chandler observed that Americans "have a reputation as ardent hobbyists and do-it-yourselfers, building everything from ship models to home improvements." The one area they have not been very active in is that of firearm construction. And that, Chandler explained, is only because "well-designed and well-made firearms are generally available as items of commerce."

A complete gun ban, or highly restrictive licensing amounting to near-ban, would create a real incentive for gun making to become a "cottage industry".

It's already happening in Great Britain, a consequence of the complete ban on civilian possession of handguns imposed by the Firearms Act of 1997. Not only are the Brits swamped today with illegally imported firearms, but local, makeshift gun factories have sprung up to compete.

British police already know about some of them. Officers from Scotland Yard's Metropolitan Police Serious Crime Group South recently recovered 12 handgun replicas which were converted to working models. An auto repair shop in London served as the front for the novel illegal gun factory. Police even found some enterprising gun-makers turning screwdrivers into workable firearms, and producing firearms disguised as ordinary key rings.

In short, closing the Winchester Repeating Arms factory - and all the others - will not spell the end of the firearm business.

Just take the case of Bougainville, the largest island in the South Pacific's Solomon Islands chain. Bougainville was the site of a bloody, decade-long secessionist uprising against domination by the government of Papua New Guinea, aided and abetted by the Australian government. The conflict there was the longest-running confrontation in the Pacific since the end of World War II, and caused the deaths of 15,000 to 20,000 islanders.

During the hostilities, which included a military blockade of the island, one of the goals was to deprive the Bougainville Revolutionary Army (BRA) of its supply of arms. The tactic failed: the BRA simply learned how to make its own guns using materiel and ammunition left over from the War.

In fact, at the United Nations Asia Pacific Regional Disarmament Conference held in Spring 2001, it was quietly admitted that the BRA, within ten years of its formation, had managed to manufacture a production copy of the M16 automatic rifle and other machine guns. (That makes one question the real intent behind the U.N. Conference on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All its Aspects, which followed several months later: the U.N. leadership can't be so daft as to fail to recognize the implications for world disarmament after learning of the success of the Bougainville Revolutionary Army.)

If this single island of Bougainville can produce its own weapons, the Philippine Islands have long had a thriving cottage industry to manufacture firearms - despite very restrictive gun laws imposed by the Marcos dictatorship and some other regimes.

Okay. By proclamation of Kopel, Gallant, and Eisen, not only do all firearms - every last one of them - vanish instantly, but there shall be no further remanufacturing.

That last part's a bit tricky. Auto repair shops, hobbyists, revolutionaries - everyone with decent machine shop skills - can make a gun from something. This takes us down the same road as drug prohibition: With primary anti-drug laws having proven themselves unenforceable, secondary laws have been added to prohibit possession of items which could be used to manufacture drugs. Even making suspicious purchases at a gardening store can earn one a "dynamic entry" visit from the local SWAT team.

But laws proscribing the possession of gun-manufacturing items would have to be even broader than laws against possession of drug-manufacturing items, because there are so many tools which can be used to make guns, or be made into guns. What we'd really have to do is carefully control every possible step in the gun-making process. That means the registration of all machine tools, and the federal licensing of plumbers (similar to current federal licensure of pharmacies), auto mechanics, and all those handymen with their screwdrivers. And we'd need to stamp a serial number on pipes (potential gun barrels) in every bathroom and automobile - and everywhere else one finds pipes - and place all the serial numbers in a federal registry.

Today, the antigun lobbies who claim they don't want to ban all guns still insist that registration of every single gun and licensing of every gun owner is essential to keep guns from falling into the wrong hands. If so, it's hard to argue that licensing and registration of gun manufacturing items would not be essential to prevent illicit production of guns.

Thus, we would have to control every part of the manufacturing process. That would add up to a very expensive, complicated proposition. Even a 1% noncompliance rate with the "Firearms Precursors Control Act" would leave an immense supply of materials available for black-market gun making.

In order to ensure total conformity with the act, it's difficult to imagine leaving most existing constitutional protections in place. The mind boggles at the kinds of search and seizure laws required to make certain that people do not possess unregistered metal pipes or screwdrivers!

For example, just to enforce a ban on actual guns (not gun precursors), the Jamaican government needed to wipe out many common law controls on police searches, and many common law guarantees of fair trials. We'd have to trash the Constitution in order to completely prevent a black market in gun precursors from taking hold. Still, as the gun-prohibition lobby always says, if it saves just one life, it would be worth it.

But, what if, despite these extreme measures, the black market still functioned - as it almost always does, when there is sufficient demand?

It's time to seriously revisit our strategy for a gun-free world. Maybe there's a shortcut around all of this.

Okay. We're going to make a truly radical, no-holds-barred proposal this time, take a quantum leap in science, and go where no man has gone before. There may be those who scoff at our proposal, but it can succeed where all other strategies have failed.

We, Kopel, Gallant, and Eisen, hereby imagine that, from this day forth, the laws of chemical combustion are revoked. We hereby imagine that gunpowder - and all similar compounds - no longer have the capacity to burn and release the gases necessary to propel a bullet.

Finally, for the first time, a gun-free world is truly within our grasp - and it's time to see what man hath wrought. And for that, all we have to do is take a look back at the kind of world our ancestors lived in.

To say that life in the pre-gunpowder world was violent would be an understatement. Land travel, especially over long distances, was fraught with danger from murderers, robbers, and other criminals. Most women couldn't protect themselves from rape, except by granting unlimited sexual access to one male in exchange for protection from other males. Back then, weapons depended on muscle power. Advances in weaponry primarily magnified the effect of muscle power. The stronger one is, the better one's prospects for fighting up close with an edged weapon like a sword or a knife, or at a distance with a bow or a javelin (both of which require strong arms). The superb ability of such "old-fashioned" edged weapons to inflict carnage on innocents was graphically demonstrated by the stabbing deaths of eight second graders on June 8, 2001, by former school clerk Mamoru Takuma in gun-free Osaka, Japan.

When it comes to muscle power, young men usually win over women, children, and the elderly. It was warriors who dominated society in gun-free feudal Europe, and a weak man usually had to resign himself to settle on a life of toil and obedience in exchange for a place within the castle walls when evil was afoot.

And what of the women? According to the custom of jus primae noctis, a lord had the right to sleep with the bride of a newly married serf on the first night - a necessary price for the serf to pay - in exchange for the promise of safety and security (does that ring a bell?). Not uncommonly, this arrangement didn't end with the wedding night, since one's lord had the practical power to take any woman, any time. Regardless of whether jus primae noctis was formally observed in a region, rich, strong men had little besides their conscience to stop them from having their way with women who weren't protected by another wealthy strongman.

But there's yet another problem with imagining gunpowder out of existence: We get rid of firearms, but we don't get rid of guns. With the advent of the blow gun some 40,000 years ago, man discovered the efficacy of a tube for concentrating air power and aiming a missile, making the eventual appearance of airguns inevitable. So gunpowder or no gunpowder, all we've been doing, thus far, amounts to quibbling over the means for propelling something out of a tube.

Airguns date back to somewhere around the beginning of the 17th century. And we don't mean airguns like the puny Daisy Red Ryder BB Gun with a compass in the stock, longed for by Ralphie in Jean Shepard's 1984 classic A Christmas Story ("No, Ralphie, you can't have a BB gun - you'll shoot your eye out!").

No, we're talking serious lethality here. The kind of powder-free gun that can hurl a 7.4 oz. projectile with a muzzle energy of 1,082 foot-pounds. Compare that to the 500 foot-pounds of muzzle energy from a typical .357 Magnum round! Even greater projectile energies are achievable using gases like nitrogen or helium, which create higher pressures than air does.

Before the advent of self-contained powder cartridge guns, airguns were considered serious weapons. In fact, three hundred years ago, air-powered guns were among the most powerful and accurate large-bore rifles around. While their biggest disadvantages were cost and intricacy of manufacture, they were more dependable and could be fired more rapidly than firearms of the same period. A butt-reservoir .31 airgun was carried by Lewis and Clark on their historic expedition, and used successfully for taking game. [See Robert D. Beeman, "Proceeding On to the Lewis & Clark Airgun," Airgun Revue 6 (2000): 13-33.] Airguns even saw duty in military engagements more than 200 years ago.

Today, fully automatic M-16-style airguns are a reality. It was only because of greater cost relative to powder guns, and the greater convenience afforded by powder arms, that airgun technology was never pushed to its lethal limits.

Other non-powder weapon systems have competed for man's attention, as well. The 20th century was the bloodiest century in the history of mankind. And while firearms were used for killing (for example, with machine guns arranged to create interlocking fields of fire in the trench warfare of World War I), they were hardly essential. By far, the greatest number of deliberate killings occurred during the genocides and democides perpetrated by governments against disarmed populations. The instruments of death ranged from Zyklon B gas to machetes to starvation.

To imagine a world with no guns is to imagine a world in which the strong rule the weak, in which women are dominated by men, and in which minorities are easily abused or mass-murdered by majorities. Practically speaking, a firearm is the only weapon that allows a weaker person to defend himself from a larger, stronger group of attackers, and to do so at a distance. As George Orwell observed, a weapon like a rifle "gives claws to the weak."

The failure of imagination among people who yearn for a gun-free world is their naive assumption that getting rid of claws will get rid of the desire to dominate and kill. They fail to acknowledge the undeniable fact that when the weak are deprived of claws (or firearms), the strong will have access to other weapons, including sheer muscle power. A gun-free world would be much more dangerous for women, and much safer for brutes and tyrants.

The one society in history that successfully gave up firearms was Japan in the 17th century, as detailed in Noel Perrin's superb book Giving Up the Gun: Japan's Reversion to the Sword 1543-1879. An isolated island with a totalitarian dictatorship, Japan was able to get rid of the guns. Historian Stephen Turnbull summarizes the result:

[The dictator] Hidéyoshi's resources were such that the edict was carried out to the letter. The growing social mobility of peasants was thus flung suddenly into reverse. The ikki, the warrior-monks, became figures of the past . . . Hidéyoshi had deprived the peasants of their weapons. Iéyasu [the next ruler] now began to deprive them of their self respect. If a peasant offended a samurai he might be cut down on the spot by the samurai's sword. [The Samurai: A Military History (New York: Macmillan, 1977).]

The inferior status of the peasantry having been affirmed by civil disarmament, the Samurai enjoyed kiri-sute gomen, permission to kill and depart. Any disrespectful member of the lower class could be executed by a Samurai's sword.

The Japanese disarmament laws helped mold the culture of submission to authority which facilitated Japan's domination by an imperialist military dictatorship in the 1930s, which led the nation into a disastrous world war.

In short, the one country that created a truly gun-free society created a society of harsh class oppression, in which the strongmen of the upper class could kill the lower classes with impunity. When a racist, militarist, imperialist government took power, there was no effective means of resistance. The gun-free world of Japan turned into just the opposite of the gentle, egalitarian utopia of John Lennon's song "Imagine."

Instead of imagining a world without a particular technology, what about imagining a world in which the human heart grows gentler, and people treat each other decently? This is part of the vision of many of the world's great religions. Although we have a long way to go, there is no denying that hundreds of millions of lives have changed for the better because people came to believe what these religions teach.

If a truly peaceful world is attainable - or, even if unattainable, worth striving for - there is nothing to be gained from the futile attempt to eliminate all guns. A more worthwhile result can flow from the changing of human hearts, one soul at a time.

Subject: Guns Targeted In Public Health Bill Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 09:49:41 -0700

The Centers for Disease Control, which calls "gun violence" a public health epidemic, has sent a "model law" to state legislatures which would give state agencies unprecedented powers in the event of a public health emergency -- including the power to seize "private property."

The first draft of the Model Emergency Health Powers Act -- the version introduced in some of the 14 states where it has been filed -- specifically includes the power to "control, restrict and regulate ... firearms ...."

Other sections of the bill authorize seizure and destruction of "private property" and exempt the state from liability.

Specific references to guns and explosives were deleted in the Dec. 21 draft. Both versions can be found on www.publichealthlaw.net, a Georgetown University project funded by CDC.

According to Monday's Wall Street Journal "The post-anthrax goal is to strengthen state authorities to cope with a serious bio-terrorism attack. But the powers could be used in other emergencies -- natural disasters, outbreaks of dangerous flu or viral strains, and chemical or nuclear attacks."

The American Legislative Exchange Council, a group of about 2,400 state legislators dedicated to free markets and individual freedom, has been on point since the bill was announced by a press release from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Earlier today I talked with Sandy Liddy Bourne who oversees this issue for ALEC. (She's the daughter of old friend Gordon Liddy.)

Sandy said the bill has been introduced in California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, South Carolina and Virginia!

Yesterday's Washington Times reports that the Transportation Department, as instructed by Congress, is developing rules to be followed in developing "smart" drivers' licenses that will include fingerprint data and could allow the government to track citizens electronically.

Since most of the citizenry has drivers' licenses, that's clearly going to become a de facto national identification card. The big question is going to be how much data it holds and who can access it.

Speaking of the Transportation Department, President Bush has made a recess appointment of John Magaw -- former head of Secret Service and BATF -- to the key role of Undersecretary of Transportation for Security.

Ironically, although gunowners have been raising Cain about the appointment, his confirmation was being blocked by Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin -- who is no friend of gunowners.

Magaw, working for former anti-gun Congressman Norm Mineta, will call the shots on allowing pilots to be armed, as authorized by Congress in the Aviation Security Act.

The Transportation Department has asked for public comment on that issue until Feb. 14.

A good account of the request, and pilots' views, is on Cybercast News at www.CNSNEWS.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=\Nation\archive\200201\NAT200 20109a.htm

Details of their request, and how to respond, are in a Gun Owners of America alert at http://www.gunowners.org/a010702.htm.

A spate of gun-armed robberies and killings has shocked the United Kingdom, and caused British newspapers and BBC to cite the tremendous increase in gun crime since the ban on legal handguns following the Dunblane, Scotland kindergarten killings.

An Associated Press article today, datelined London, reports: "Dave Rodgers, vice chairman of the Metropolitan Police Federation, said the ban made little difference to the number of guns in the hands of criminals. According to a recent survey, the number of crimes in which a handgun was reported increased nationally from 2,648 in 1997-98 to 3,685 in 1999-2000. 'The underground supply of guns does not seem to have dried up at all,' he said."

So...We want to know: Does Yoko Ono, like Rosie O'Donnell and probably other anti-self-defense proponents, employ any armed guards? Whom do the anti-gunners call when a crime is being committed against them?

safest city in the country, and Jamaica would be the safest country in the world. (See http://www.jpfo.org/bord.htm for more on this.)

(Incidentally, there's a story going around that members of Congress, of both House and Senate, are exempted from D.C.'s draconian gun ban, and that they are permitted to keep guns in their offices. If anyone out there knows anything about this, please let UsAtThem know.)

"When you disarm your subjects you offend them by showing that either from cowardliness or lack of faith, you distrust them; and either conclusion will induce them to hate you." Niccolo Machiavelli "The Prince"

It's the 535 members of the United States Congress - the same group that cranks out hundreds of new laws each year designed to keep the rest of us in line.

The following story can be verified by going to http://www.msnbc.com/news/688939.asp

January 18, 2002

ALERT: Armed Citizen Helped Stop Law School Killer

Read the story at http://www.msnbc.com/news/688939.asp

"A 43-year-old naturalized U.S. citizen from Nigeria, went to the Appalachian School of Law on Wednesday to talk to his dean, L. Anthony Sutin, about Odighizuwa's dismissal for failing grades, officials said. He shot Sutin and professor Thomas Blackwell, who taught Odighizuwa's contracts classes, with a ..380-caliber pistol, authorities and students said. Also killed was student Angela Dales, 33..."

We at JPFO express our anger at the killer, our sympathy for the survivors of the three persons killed and for those three others who were gravely injured, as well as to all those who grieve and suffer with them.

Before this story becomes recorded as "another senseless school shooting" that "proves why handguns should be banned," we think everyone should know the whole story. Thanks to Robert Waters, author of _The Best Defense_ (www.robertwaters.net), we received the link to the MSNBC report that states:

"Students ended the rampage by confronting and then tackling the gunman, officials said."

"We saw the shooter, stopped at my vehicle and got out my handgun and started to approach Peter," Tracy Bridges, who helped subdue the shooter with other students, said Thursday on NBC's "Today" show. "At that time, Peter threw up his hands and threw his weapon down. Ted was the first person to have contact with Peter, and Peter hit him one time in the face, so there was a little bit of a struggle there."

In other words: an armed student helped stop the killer. At this point we don't know whether the attacker (Peter) decided to stop before or after he saw the armed student, but we do know that the student Tracy Bridges:

(1) Was prepared for defense by being armed
(2) Had the presence of mind to obtain the weapon when it was needed most
(3) Would have been capable of stopping the attacker if some other means (tackling, etc.) had failed

We at JPFO salute that student, Tracy Bridges, for having the foresight to be armed and for the courage to use the firearm to save lives. Tracy Bridges exercised the right to keep and bear arms the way that every competent non-violent American should feel proud to do.

We needed four Tracy Bridges on September 11, 2001 -- armed.

The Liberty Crew

Thanks to you, the Impact Voters of America is now the Nation's largest grassroots network!

This quarters sponsor is Senitel Communications. For top tier long distance at 4.5 cents per minute and no hidden charges, visit Senitel at www.senitel.com .

The following story can be verified by going to http://www.msnbc.com/news/688939.asp

January 18, 2002

ALERT: Armed Citizen Helped Stop Law School Killer

Read the story at http://www.msnbc.com/news/688939.asp

"A 43-year-old naturalized U.S. citizen from Nigeria, went to the Appalachian School of Law on Wednesday to talk to his dean, L. Anthony Sutin, about Odighizuwa's dismissal for failing grades, officials said. He shot Sutin and professor Thomas Blackwell, who taught Odighizuwa's contracts classes, with a 380-caliber pistol, authorities and students said. Also killed was student Angela Dales, 33..."

We at JPFO express our anger at the killer, our sympathy for the survivors of the three persons killed and for those three others who were gravely injured, as well as to all those who grieve and suffer with them.

Before this story becomes recorded as "another senseless school shooting" that "proves why handguns should be banned," we think everyone should know the whole story. Thanks to Robert Waters, author of _The Best Defense_ (www.robertwaters.net), we received the link to the MSNBC report that states:

"Students ended the rampage by confronting and then
tackling the gunman, officials said."

"We saw the shooter, stopped at my vehicle and got out my handgun and started to approach Peter," Tracy Bridges, who helped subdue the shooter with other students, said Thursday on NBC's "Today" show. "At that time, Peter threw up his hands and threw his weapon down. Ted was the first person to have contact with Peter, and Peter hit him one time in the face, so there was a little bit of a struggle there."

In other words: an armed student helped stop the killer. At this point we don't know whether the attacker (Peter) decided to stop before or after he saw the armed student, but we do know that the student Tracy Bridges:

(1) Was prepared for defense by being armed
(2) Had the presence of mind to obtain the weapon when it was needed most
(3) Would have been capable of stopping the attacker if some other means (tackling, etc.) had failed

We at JPFO salute that student, Tracy Bridges, for having the foresight to be armed and for the courage to use the firearm to save lives. Tracy Bridges exercised the right to keep and bear arms the way that every competent non-violent American should feel proud to do.

We needed four Tracy Bridges on September 11, 2001 -- armed.

The Liberty Crew

Thanks to you, the Impact Voters of America is now the Nation's largest grassroots network!

This quarters sponsor is Senitel Communications. For top tier long distance at 4.5 cents per minute and no hidden charges, visit Senitel at www.senitel.com .

Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
LPNC-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

what was it that old piece of paper said - something about being secure in our papers? Oh, yeah, the FOURTH AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION - guess California isn't covered by the US Constitution.

Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

____________________________________________________________________________________

State Court Backs Police on Searches Rights: Justices split sharply in 4-3 ruling allowing car inspections for license, registration. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-012502search.story

SAN FRANCISCO -- Police in California may search cars if a driver fails to produce a license or registration regardless of whether the officer has a warrant, the state Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

Justice Joyce Kennard, one of the dissenters, suggested the ruling may have been motivated by security fears stemming from the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

"As this opinion is being written, our nation is undergoing a painful recovery from the devastating physical and psychological effects of that day," Kennard wrote. She said the ruling "does nothing to enhance our security and does much to erode our 4th Amendment rights."

California courts previously have allowed police making routine traffic stops to search for licenses and registrations in glove compartments and under visors. The Supreme Court's decision Thursday approves for the first time searches under the seats of cars and elsewhere when there is no reason to believe a crime has been committed, lawyers in the case said.

Other courts have also given police more freedom in dealing with motorists. The U.S. Supreme Court earlier this month reaffirmed that police have extensive leeway in determining when to stop motorists and that they may rely on innocent-looking actions as grounds for their suspicions.

The state high court's majority, in an opinion written by Chief Justice Ronald M. George, reasoned that police can look for documents in a vehicle to determine the identity of the driver and the owner of the vehicle. The decision upheld two police searches in Orange and Solano counties in which drugs were found under car seats and the drivers were prosecuted for possession.

"Limited warrantless searches for required registration and identification documentation are permissible," George wrote, when the officers look for documents "in an area where such documents reasonably may be be expected to be found."

George contended that allowing such searches would be less intrusive than arresting a motorist for driving without a license. He also noted that it would not be permissible to search a car trunk unless the officer had reason to believe the documentation was in there.

Voting with George were Justices Marvin Baxter, Ming W. Chin and Justice Carlos R. Moreno, whom Gov. Gray Davis recently appointed to fill a vacancy left by the death of Justice Stanley Mosk in June. Mosk frequently sided with defendants in police search cases.

The U.S. Supreme Court has never ruled in a case involving the kind of circumstances before the California court, although some high courts in other states have upheld searches for vehicle registration.

The three dissenting justices sharply accused the majority of violating the U.S. Constitution by creating a "blanket" exception to warrant requirements.

Justice Kathryn Mickle Werdegar said the majority erred in saying that the space beneath a driver's seat is a reasonable place to keep vehicle registration. She also noted that driver's licenses are not usually kept under a car's seat and contended the Constitution prohibits car searches for licenses.

"Nothing--not the Constitution, nor any statute nor the cases cited by the majority--authorizes police to conduct a warrantless vehicle search in an attempt to discover the license of a driver who asserts he or she does not have it in the car," Werdegar wrote.

If a driver fails to produce a license, the officer can run the driver's name on a computer, ask the driver to submit a thumbprint, accept another form of identification or arrest the driver, she said.

"By what logic," she asked, "would a police officer believe that searching a vehicle for a person's driver's license would be fruitful when the driver has just informed the officer that he does not have a license in possession?"

Kennard, joined by Justice Janice Rogers Brown, discussed "the horrendous events of Sept. 11" and asked whether anyone would ever be able to forget them.

Part of the recovery has been to create more security for citizens but "an equally important part" should be a "rededication to the principles upon which our nation was founded," Kennard wrote.

She predicted the ruling "may well result in limitless searches throughout a vehicle whenever a driver cannot produce the requisite documentation." -[snip]-

Don't believe anything you read on the Net unless: 1) you can confirm it with another source, and/or 2) it is consistent with what you already know to be true.

To subscribe send message to mailto:majordomo@efga.org and type "subscribe scan" in the BODY. To be removed type "unsubscribe scan". For additional instructions see http://www.efga.org/about/maillist.html

http://www.networkusa.org/fingerprint/page1b/fp-contributions.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "Scan This News" is Sponsored by S.C.A.N. Host of the "FIGHT THE FINGERPRINT!" web page: www.networkusa.org/fingerprint.shtml

From: Clarence Young [orphanman@surfbest.net] Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 10:22 AM

Many of you have probably heard about the controversial gun law passed in Kennesaw, Georgia in 1982. It stated that every head of household be "required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefore."

Soon after the law was established loopholes were created that could allow some to be excluded from the law. Those who are exempt are people with physical or mental disabilities and those whose religious beliefs prohibit them

The explanation for this law was simple: "In order to provide for the emergency management of the City, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants" (see the city of Kennesaw's official site for the entire ordinance).

it to court as "un-constitutional"; they failed in their plea to have the ordinance removed. Many said that it would cause "rioting in the streets

plunged, reaching unheard of lows! According to the FBI Uniform Crime Report, in 1981, Kennesaw had 54 burglaries with a population of 5,242. In 1999, with

a population increase up to 19,000, only 36 burglaries were reported! That's over 81% per capita decrease in burglaries!

on the Community, said that following the law's passage, "the crime rate dropped 89 percent in the city, compared to a 10 percent drop statewide." What is the explanation of this incredible decrease in crime? As Ronald Reagan would say, referring to peace at a national level, "Peace through Strength." The Soviets weren't going to risk their own necks when they

be applied to the local level as well; criminals see it the same way as the Soviets did. They aren't going to risk their necks when they know that

there is a high likelihood that their intended victim may be carrying a .45 and willing to use it. As Theodore Roosevelt said, "Speak softly but carry a

less burglaries every year! Imagine the impact that this would have not only on the potential victims but also on the entire nation! Not to mention the decrease in all violent crimes including murder, rape, and aggravated a