This is a forwarded message which may or may not reflect my own opinion.
Mr. Jamison is a Kansas City attorney and Director of Western Missouri
Shooters Alliance:
 * Originally By: Kevin Jamison
 * Originally To: All
 * Originally Re: Liberty Notes
 * Original Date: 04 Aug 96  19:10
 * Original Area: PR_NET
It is a good day for Liberty.
I watched Laurence Fishburne in *Othello*.  Damn good job.  It is
a play for lawyers, concerning evidence and what convinces.
Trifles which reinforce Othello's jealousy are taken as
incontestable proof, and direct evidence to the contrary is
disregarded as lies.  This tells us something about how to press
our case.  Direct evidence may be rejected, but trifles reinforcing
existing prejudice may lead them to the light.
I heard from Tim Oliver, DARES Intl, in Columbia.  He's been
teaching my sister to shoot, and it appears that she catches on
quickly, of course one must consider she has a good instructor.  It
seems that she asked what I shoot, and being informed took up a
1911A1, and got very good with it.  Kim always was an over-
achiever.  She's a doctor, a kidney specialist.  They had her look
at an Egyptian mummy once, and it got better.  Mind, it was not one
of the really old mummies, and it did not get a great deal better,
but we thought it was remarkable.
What to do about Bob Dole.  Starting with basics, I think we must
first consider if he is as bad as Bill Clinton (a DC area
president).  Clinton is an ideologue, he gets up each morning
thinking of ways to infringe our liberty, regardless of the cost.
Dole is a politician.  He will bargain away our liberty if
something is to be received for it, but will not initiate such
action so long as we can make it politically expensive.  It has
been suggested to me that we in the movement have failed to prove
our case to the general public, that most think the gun ban applies
to machine guns.  If this is so we have failed and badly.  Dole, in
his race for the center has abandoned his base, foolish and
unprincipled even given our failure.  What to do then.  We could
endorse him, if we believe that he will be marginally better than
Clinton.  This would then cheapen our endorsements.  We could tell
our people to stay home, loosing the congress as well as the White
house.  We could endorse a third party, drawing enough votes off to
guarantee Clinton's re-election (in all probability).  This would
show that we do have somewhere else to go, and are willing to do
so.  It also increases the number of votes Clinton must get to
again achieve a plurality of presidential votes.  It does not seem
a formula for victory, it is extremely unlikely that a third party
will win the White House this year.  If the votes cast for a third
party were impressive, the politicianthings might pay attention,
and might moderate their activities accordingly.  This relies on a
big "if" and two large "mights".  Clinton would be in his second
term with nothing to loose.  He has shown his willingness to spend
large amounts on pork barrel projects in order to get what he
wants, and he wants our guns (among other things).  We could
endorse no one, remind our members of how bad Clinton has been, and
how much worse he will be, and let them decide for themselves.
If we hoist our flag on Dole's sinking ship, Clinton's victory will
be an endorsement of gun control.  If we publicly walk away from
Dole, this might remove this problem, or at least reduce it.  If
Dole chooses a running mate who is on our side, this shows some
concession to our movement, and a probable candidate for the 2000
election.  This may at least give us something to work for.
On hearing of Dole's betrayal, my first impulse was the same as the
editor of the Western Missouri Shooters Alliance BULLET, vote
Libertarian.  I have done so in the past, and do not regret it,
although those were the years which brought us Carter and Clinton.
However, I dislike making impulsive decisions.  I would abdicate my
responsibilities as a Board Member of WMSA to fail to consider all
aspects of the political situation, and what course to take this
year which would give us the best chance of victory in the next
four years, and beyond.  It is probable that I have not thought
through all aspects of the problem, or all possible courses of
action.  Events at the Republican convention may affect my
thinking, and may not.
The point to strive for is victory.  As I tell my criminal clients,
I like to win, but there are different flavors of winning.  Four
years of minimum security, rather than thirty in medium security is
a win; and that appears to be the choice, that or something
similar.  As I cannot conceive of how we can endorse Dole under the
present circumstances, how to affect the "something similar", and
still win, would appear to be the question.
I have not decided how I will vote on the course WMSA will take in
this matter.  My vote will be predicated on the best means to
victory.  At one time, getting most of the tattered, unarmed
remnants of the British Expeditionary Force off the beach at
Dunkirk was considered a victory.  I hope we can do better.
I've tested the Walker Tactical Ear.  This is a hearing aid size
device which fits above one ear and runs a tube through a foam
insert in the ear canal.  The other ear is protected by a foam
plug.  The Tactical Ear amplifies conversation and sounds which
intruders might make, but blocks out the report of firearms.  This
gives the citizen an advantage to locate the intruder, and enables
his hearing to survive any shooting.  Muzzle blast in confined
quarters may stun the shooter, and temporarily deafen him/her.
After the shooting, the Ear helps identify other intruders, family
members, or responding police.  This has possibilities.
-!- WM v3.11/92-0211
 ! Origin: PRN/CENTRAL  (176:200/0)
======================================================================
--- FMail 1.02
---------------