Sarah Brady’s view of bathtubs

[Highwayman]

The Slippery Menace

Unregulated bathtubs cause over 200,000 injuries every year How many more must die in the cold porcelain of the household bathtub before we come to our collective senses? This all too common appliance is a proven killer. Unregulated bathtubs cause over 200,000 injuries every year. There are over 100 drownings and 70 people cooked to death in scalding bath water each and every year. Add the suicides, falls, and deliberate murders that take place in tubs, and the death toll mounts. Sadly, children comprise 75% of the fatalities.

Many European nations have long recognized the risk inherent in bathtubs and have reduced the use of them. Yet in the United States, the bathing culture is rampant, and leads to death and suffering on a gigantic scale. There are those who claim that bath tub use is justified under certain circumstances. Some claim that bathtubs are necessary for cleanliness. Is personal vanity more important to you than a child's safety?

Recreation is often espoused as a legitimate use of the bathtub but can be disregarded out of hand. No brief thrill is worth the cost of maintaining one of these deadly instruments of destruction in your home. Research shows that the chances of drowning or being boiled in your bathtub are greater than the chances of inducing a supermodel of the opposite sex to share it with you.

Steps should be taken at once to register tubs. Our government at present does not even know for sure how many of these killer devices exist! Simply incorporating a few questions into the upcoming census would help authorities to determine the size of regulatory agency needed to enforce license requirements.

Many bathtubs hold up to 18 inches of water. The variety known as the "spa" or "hot tub" may hold even more, and has been implicated in cases of date rape. Some of these assault tubs can have as much as 24 inches of water and various automatic jets, whirlpools, and heaters, which make them attractive to the criminal bather. Our legislature should take steps to limit all new bathtubs to holding 3 inches of water. This should reduce the chances of mass drowning significantly.

Of course, children make up the overwhelming number of bathtub victims. Even if you do not own a bathtub, your child's friends may have parents who are irresponsible bathers. The common sense solution is for people to use faucet locks. Faucet locks can be easily mandated by government, enforced by a new agency set up specifically with tub safety in mind, and subject to in-home inspections at households with registered bathtubs.

Regardless of any "right" claimed by the pro-bathing crowd, (a right which is never mentioned in the Constitution) precedents have already been established for bathroom fixture regulation. The Supreme Court has so far refused to hear any cases involving environmentally friendly commodes, thereby pointing out the foolishness of those who say that the government requirement of a toilet that doesn't work is some kind of tyranny. We should continue to educate these malcontents and inform their children of the stubborn and selfish ways of their parents.

How can you get involved in insuring your children's safety? The most important thing you can do is to eliminate your bathtub immediately. Your tub is not "necessary" to your family's well being, and in fact is more likely to kill or injure a member of your family or a friend, than it is to drown a burglar. The benefits of eliminating your tub will be immediate and noticeable. There will be a certain air about you that says, "I did away with my bathtub and I'm safer for it." Lobby your legislators to immediately invoke new laws to insure your safety from tubs. Give them money if you have to. Write nasty letters, stage protests, and organize anti-bathing individuals to stand around in legislative chambers. You WILL be noticed. Finally, join Bathtub Sanity, the only organization dedicated to your safety from this menace. At B.S. we are constantly involved in political action, research, and public education. We even maintain a facility containing various models of assault tubs, which our staff researches and tests at considerable personal danger.

Your children deserve to be safe, no matter the inconvenience or hardship. They cry out for your protection. Would you deny them?

[Highwayman]

Hammer Control, Inc.

A sudden surge of hammer-related deaths has sent the number of tool-related assaults soaring. With the Louisiana woman who beat her husband on the head with a hammer and the man who killed a 13-year old boy with a sledge hammer, these crimes are out of control!

I am trying to get a handle on this situation early by creating a new organization: Hammer Control Incorporated. HCI's mandate is to oppose the power and influence of the National Hammer Association (NHA) and lobby for strict hammer control.

I think we have a good chance to get some ground-breaking legislation passed. First, we have to develop a national system to register and track anyone who sells hammers. We can sell Federal Hammer Licenses (FHLs) for individuals and businesses who want to deal in hammers. This would offset some of the enforcement costs and keep some people out of the business. We must have a licensing system to control these dangerous hammers! Otherwise, people will be selling hammers out of their homes to criminals! Hammer storage must be reviewed by the local police who can inspect the storage area and ensure it meets zoning requirements.

Secondly, we must not allow anyone under the age of 21 to purchase a hammer. It must also be a crime for anyone to give a hammer to someone who is under 21 years of age. We will limit the number of hammers an individual can purchase. The purchaser must fill out several forms before the seller can transfer the hammer to them. This would encourage the creation of a national hammer registry. Any purchaser must wait for five days before they get their hammer. (This will prevent any crimes of passion.)

Thirdly, we must prevent anyone with a criminal past from obtaining a hammer. This applies equally to adults as well as children. If a child hits anything, that child will probably grow up to become a hammer-wielding killer! Perhaps we could fund some scientific studies to prove this point.

Fourthly, we must outlaw the use of pneumatic nailers by everyone except law enforcement and the military. Those things develop hundreds of strokes a minute! They are much too dangerous to allow our citizens to own. You don't need a pneumatic hammer to build a doll house!

Lastly, we must restrict the importation of foreign hammers and even nails onto our soil. We don't want their shoddy foreign hammers making their way into the hands of street thugs and gangsters! There are already too many hammers in American households. We don't need any more!

There are some sideline issues we can develop as well. We must create hammer-free zones around our schools. We can create an ownership tax on related items like replacement handles and nails. We can lobby for additional laws to control the type, length, size, etc. of replacement handles and accessories. Perhaps we can have nails tagged so if they are ever used in a crime they can be traced. We could also have a hammer buy-back program; if we find a sponsor, we could trade goods for hammers!

Thank goodness there is no such thing as a Constitutional Right to own a hammer! That Constitution thing is so old anyway, how can it be expected to cover all of these new things that we have to protect ourselves from? Besides, we can trust our government. Have they ever done anything and tried to cover it up?

If you are not sure of your position on hammer control, ask yourself: What about the children? We are doing this for them so they can grow up in a society free of the threat of hammer-related violence! If you want to make our nation safer and reduce the threat of hammer-violence, please join with me to stamp out hammers!

[Highwayman]

If Golf Were Like Shooting

By Charlie McMillion

February 1, 2002

I am a competitive shooter. My friend Bill is an accomplished golfer. We have had numerous discussions about the similarities of our respective sports. Recently, the subject turned to the hassles involved in participating in our pastimes. Bill's major complaint was the hassle involved in flying with golf clubs and the risk of them being stolen. After I finished telling him about the incredible "hassle-factor" in the shooting sports he promised to never complain again. That discussion prompted me to ponder how the golfers of America would feel if golf were like shooting. I think they would be outraged, to the point of storming the Capitol, because:

Golfers would constantly be attacked and vilified by the politically active, anti-golf crowd. These groups would stop at nothing, including radically distorting facts, to meet their ultimate goal: the prohibition of ownership of golf equipment by civilians in the U.S.

In some states, golfers would be limited to the purchase of one golf club a month. Who needs more than one club, anyway? Anyone possessing more than one club would be labeled a "golf-nut" who owned an "arsenal" of clubs.

The anti-golf crowd would scream for a ban on Big Bertha drivers, because they can hit a ball too far. At the same time, they would scream for a ban on lob wedges, because they are short and easily concealable.

New clubs would only be legally available through licensed dealers, with strict, federal oversight provided by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Golf Clubs.

Airlines would allow golfers to travel with their clubs, provided they were declared upon arrival and checked. Attempting to carry clubs on board an aircraft would be a federal crime. Golf balls would have to be secured in a separate, locked container, and no more than five pounds of golf balls could be checked.

Golf club manufacturers that wanted to sell their clubs in Maryland would have to hit three balls with each club, said balls to be provided to the Maryland State Police for high-tech "fingerprinting" and cataloging.

Manufacturers that wanted to sell in California would have to "drop test" their clubs. This would involve dropping every type of club to be sold, in every possible configuration of grip, shaft and head, onto concrete and ruining it.

Cutting the shaft of any golf club to a length of less than 18" would be a federal crime, as would the possession of such a "sawed-off club".

All clubs would have to be engraved by the manufacturer with a unique serial number.

Driving ranges would be subject to closure whenever homes are built within a mile.

Whenever there was a terrorist attack on the U.S., Kmart would halt sales of clubs and balls in an attempt to "insure the safety of the public". Golfers could then begin a boycott of Kmart, contributing to its demise and forcing it to file for bankruptcy protection.

In Massachusetts, golfers would have to have a license to buy balls.

In all states except Vermont, a citizen would have to have a permit to carry any golf club that was hidden from view but readily accessible. Some states would allow golfers to carry clubs in the open, but they would be subject to arrest for disturbing the peace.

All non-permit holders would have to be very careful when transporting clubs and balls. They would have to be in separate, locked containers and positioned in the vehicle so as to not be readily accessible.

Anti-golf politicians, unable to realize their agenda through legislation, would resort to suing golf club manufacturers for creating a public nuisance.

Hitting balls on your own property could be a crime.

In New York, allowing a caddy that is under the age of 18 to carry your clubs would be a crime, as would teaching anyone under 18 to handle a club.

A convicted felon, or anyone convicted of a violent misdemeanor, would be prohibited from possessing golf clubs for life.

A golfer would have to be 18 to buy a long club, but 21 to buy a short one. Likewise, a golfer could buy balls when they were 18, but would have to wait until they were 21 if they intended to hit them with a short club.

It would be illegal to buy a club for someone who could not legally purchase one.

If a golfer were forced to live in public housing, they might have to agree not to own clubs or balls. They could also be subject to club searches.

If a golfer that wanted to own a machineclub (a club capable of hitting more than one ball with a single swing) would have to go through an enormous amount of paperwork, be fingerprinted, have a background check by the FBI, and pay a $200 federal transfer tax.

A golfer could ship a club to a clubsmith for repair, but short clubs would have to be sent by air.

The anti-golf groups would be calling for the development of "smart clubs". These futuristic, high-tech clubs would allow themselves to be swung only by their owners, as long as the batteries weren't dead.

Hypocritical, liberal talk show hostesses would call for a ban on civilian possession of golf clubs, while employing bodyguards who regularly engage in the game.

There would be a waiting period of up to 15 days in some states to take possession of legally-purchased clubs.

Children would be dragged from school in handcuffs for possessing tiny facsimiles of clubs and would be subject to suspension for drawing pictures of clubs or swinging objects as one would swing a club.

Ownership or possession of short clubs would be prohibited in Washington, DC -- unless you worked for the government.

There would be no legally-owned clubs in Japan, but all adult males in Switzerland would be required to keep machineclubs.

Anti-club groups would focus attention on the criminal misuse of clubs, but would totally ignore the millions of times each year clubs are used legitimately.

Journalist Carl Rowan would decry the private ownership of clubs. Then he would use his own privately-owned club to hit balls at teenagers on his property.

Churches and civic groups would sponsor club buy-back and amnesty turn-ins. Clubs collected through these efforts would be melted down -- or simply disappear from the police property room, likely into someone's private club collection.

There would be bans on production and ownership of "assault clubs". These clubs would be functionally no different than other clubs, they would just look like they could hit more balls.

The first act of fascist dictators would be to take the clubs away from the populace.

The anti-club crowd would try the backdoor strategy of having the EPA close down driving ranges because the core of a golf ball is toxic when consumed.

Hollywood liberals would condemn the private ownership of clubs, all the while making fortunes producing movies that glorify wanton golf club violence. These movies would contain egregious technical errors concerning clubs, such as showing a ball in flight while still in its box.

A British-owned club manufacturer would sign onto a traitorous deal with the US government in exchange for special consideration in federal club purchase contracts.

Pickup trucks would have golf club racks in the rear windows.

Anti-club groups would cook data and declare that home-owners are 43 times more likely to hit a friend or a family member with their club than to use it properly.

People would be relatively free to own and use clubs, and could even send them through the US mail, until the government passed the massive Golf Club Control Act.

Some employers would prohibit clubs in vehicles on their property. If golfers worked for such a company and wanted to go to the local range to hit balls during lunch, they would have to drive home, get their clubs, go to the range, and drive back home to drop the clubs off again before returning to work.

The United Nations would sponsor massive club collections and would run the clubs over with tanks. They would condemn the US for not participating in global small-clubs control.

Nitwitted anti-club politicians would carelessly swing clubs over the heads of reporters during press conferences while espousing the dangers of club ownership. When questioned about their handling of the clubs, they would respond "I knew the club was empty. The State Police would never hand me a loaded club".

Senator McCain would introduce legislation to close a non-existent club show loophole.

School golf teams and tournaments would be a thing of the past. Old-timers would fondly remember the days when students would actually take their clubs to school for practice, but the thought of using them to hurt someone was the farthest things from their minds.

Yet, golfers would be told they should feel lucky, because in many countries there is a complete ban on golf club ownership.

[Highwayman]

Treasury Department to recall 25 million coins.

Washington D.C. Sat. April 1, 2000

The U.S. Treasury Department has announced today that it will re-call all 25 million commemorative quarters honoring the admission of Massachusetts into the union.

Over a ten year period all quarters coined will have on the reverse side a symbol honoring a state’s admission to the union. Five were minted in 1999 honoring the first five States. This year the first state to be honored is Massachusetts.

The recall of the Massachusetts quarters is prompted by the outcry from many groups over the depiction of a man with a gun. The depiction represents the minutemen who fired the first shots of the revolutionary war and has been used by the State of Massachusetts as a state symbol. President Clinton has signed an executive order forcing the treasury department to recall these quarters and issue ones more appropriate to the history of Massachusetts.

A committee of Massachusetts’s legislators and U. S. Treasury officials approved the design. President Clinton through his spokesman Joe Lockhart stated that he was not properly informed by this committee and is outraged that the coin was released without his approval. Sarah Brady, the outgoing president of Handgun Control, Inc., said today, "This administration has committed an act of insensitivity unprecedented in recent history. How can the President at one time name the White House press briefing room in honor of my husband Jim Brady, who was horribly wounded by a gun, and then allow a coin to be issued containing the picture of a gun."

Donna Dees-Thomases, organizer of the Million Mothers March against guns said, " This coin sends the wrong message to our children. It says to the children that guns are not always dangerous, evil objects that should only be possessed by the government. Also, I noticed that the rifle on the quarter does not have a trigger lock."

Wayne LaPierre, spokesman for the Gun Lobby said, " This is the type of hysterical over-reaction we have come to expect from these ninnies."

We have also learned that Sen. Charles Schumer (D. N.Y.) suffered personal humiliation and was injured as a result of the release of the Massachusetts commemorative quarter. Sen. Schumer was recently elevated to the Senate from the House of Representatives chiefly because of his unyielding stance for reasonable gun control legislation. Sen. Schumer was drinking in an upscale Georgetown watering hole with Sen. Ted Kennedy (D. Mass.). According to police reports, Senator Kennedy was idly flipping a quarter, which just happened to be the newest release. The quarter landed unnoticed in Senator Schumer’s glass. As Sen. Schumer lifted the glass to take a sip, he spied there in the bottom an image of a man with a gun. The Senator was so frightened by this he dropped the glass and dove under the table. Sen. Kennedy seeing this, and believing Sen. Schumer had a waitress down there, dove on top of him causing minor injuries.

[Highwayman]

Ban them Now
by Michael Z. Williamson

Imagine a machine designed for the military. It is heavily built, very tough, and utterly unforgiving of mistakes. It is ugly, metallic and plastic, and has no aesthetic qualities. It has evolved over the years to greater power, and has become so easy to operate that even children can do so. It makes our troops more efficient at their unpleasant task of killing our enemies.

Incredibly, this state of the art piece of military hardware is available, with thin disguising, to civilians. There’s a subculture in this country that buys millions of them. There are no restrictions on ownership, no need to justify the possession of one of these high-tech killing machines.

Even worse, there aren’t even reasonable laws on safe storage. No requirement to render them inoperable when not in use, nor that they be safely locked away. Children get hold of them every day, and cause hundreds of accidents and injuries, and all too often, deaths.

Technology exists to lock them in such a fashion that they can’t be operated by any except the owner, but the death merchants who sell them, and the extremist users of these "toys" refuse to consider any legislation mandating such. They suffer from some Freudian inadequacy that makes the very mention an affront to their manhood.

These enemies of society are organized, too. They have dozens of organizations with millions of members that shout down any attempt at rational debate. They shout about their "rights" to utilize these weapons for "sporting" purposes, or for use in militaristic death games. They won’t even accept a simple cooling-off period as a compromise.

Something happens to a person who owns one. They get lazy and stupid. They take these things everywhere, out of a paranoid fear that they might "need" them. Society is poisoned by the residue from the chemicals used for the propellant for these weapons of mass destruction. We all pay the price for the use of them.

Nowhere else in the world is there such a plague of them. Most other nations are sensible enough to make possession awkward, require special licensing, and severely punish those who commit crimes. Here, one can be drunk and stupid and utterly murderous, and walk away with a slap on the wrist.

More than 40,000 people a year are killed by these idiots with their macho, adventure-movie attitudes. 40,000. The population of an entire suburban town. Many of them helpless children who have no idea what is happening. All this, so a bunch a fanatical idiots can maintain their "right." Their right to be stupid. Their right to play action movie star. Their right to kill.

The time for debate and compromise is over. It is time to ban them immediately. Round them up, destroy them all. Some speak of buying them back, but the cost is prohibitive. Society has no obligation to pay these people for their destructive devices. No civilized person should own one. Simply seize them and destroy them immediately.

Save lives. End suffering. Help society.

Ban automobiles now.